This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
No, it's even easier - Kamala can say she's prosecuted sex criminals and frauds like Trump before, and no, the Willie Brown attack is not going to work outside of the Republican base.
However, if you want suburban women to vote 75-25 for Harris, then go ahead and do that attack.
It's my impression that women hate women who use sex to get ahead in the way that Kamala did.
Married women for sure. It’s a threat to their marriage having other women sleeping with their men. Kamala did come a decade after his divorce but there they still don’t want formerly married men doing well.
Nit: he was separated when they dated, not divorced.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Both arguments sound plausible to me. This is why focus groups exist, I suppose.
More options
Context Copy link
Sure, in their own personal life, maybe. Not being told that by right-wingers who want to ban abortion as they're calling Kamala a DEI candidate.
But hey, as a left-wing social democrat, I can only hope the Republican campaign becomes all about Willie Brown, how Kamala is a DEI candidate, and so on.
What’s the difference between a R or D President for a left wing social democrat?
A pro-union NLRB, support for expanded health care access, a plan to increase manufacturing that actually creates jobs as opposed to just increase tariffs, an IRS that goes after billionaire and millionaire tax cheats, stopping various Republican attempts to deregulate environmental, labor, and other sorts of law or cut social spending, putting Democratic judges on the bench, attempts at student loan forgiveness and reform, criminal justice reform, and since I'm a social progressive like the vast majority of social democrats outside of stupidpol, support for immigration, abortion, LGBT rights, feminism, and action against climate change.
Joe Biden has been the best President of my lifetime, and Kamala will likely be even be better because she won't be as wedded to being nice to Republican's or as abashedly pro-Zionist.
Regardless of what edgy rich left-wing podcasters in Brooklyn may claim, there are differences between the two parties, which is despite being to the left of 95% of the population, I am a partisan Democratic party supporter. Give me STV or proportional voting and I'll shift, but in a FPTP EC-based system, changing the Democratic Party form within is the only way for the goals I support to have a chance.
Thanks for the response!
Not sure why my question wasn’t so well received … maybe it seemed I was being snarky by others.
I want universal healthcare, a complete over haul at the universities (free, or close), eventual ubi, and I’m sure several other progressive goals but I can’t vote Democrat … I have no idea where I can vote. I’m politically powerless, or at least that’s how it feels.
I mean, you can vote for those things, if you start to care less about other things. For instance, there are still plenty of people who don't like gay people in the Democratic coalition, they're just mainly old black people who don't care that much about it.
Like, I'm not a leftie who doesn't think there are people with legitimately cross-pressured opinions, but at a certain point, I have to say, "OK, you care more about thing x than thing y we agree on. I'm not going to change my view on thing x or agree we need to compromise, because I care deeply about that issue as well. Good luck on finding a candidate that matches what you care about.'
That's why primaries happen - people vote for their preference, then they decide on whether the person that won is acceptable. I voted for Edwards in '08 and Bernie in '16 & '20, but Obama, Hillary, and Biden were all acceptable, because the alternative in all cases was a in my view, right-wing reactionary to fascist party.
There are also people who feel politically homeless - that was many, many, many progressive people from basically the late 80's to mid-00's, people who thought the New Deal consensus was terrible from the late 30's to early 60's, and so on.
Plus, on the issues you mentioned, there has been advancement - the new IBR plans for student loans, expansion of ACA subsidies, a CTC for one year (damn you Manchin), and so on. It's not enough, but it's still better than anything being offered up by the other side.
I'm also going to be honest and say I thought you were likely trolling, but it took me five minutes max to write-up that response, so why not actually give the pro-Democratic position that basically doesn't exist here.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link