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 -
This is aimed not specifically at you, @No_one, but more about at the general discussion around this topic.
I wasn't sure at first how to express my general feelings on this, but it's something along the lines of Neema Parvini's (and guest's) comments (from about 51:40 to 57:30, though the broader context begins around 47:00).
This is a non-story on a number of levels. First, it seems like another example of ginned up outrage-bait slop from the usual right-wing containment outlets. Secondly, even to the extent it's real, Google autocomplete has to be the most trivial level of interference. It's not like they're outright preventing you from searching the terms in question, nor are they preventing these terms from providing relevant results.
And third, that Google is politically biased and Silicon Valley hates the right should not be news to anyone at this point. So what's the point of making a fuss about it, or any other similar little issue in the endless flood of them? And the more important question, the one I find myself asking more and more when people vent about this or that "outrage" by the other side, and the one I'd like to ask all the people griping on Twitter, is "so what are you going to do about it?"
Like Parvini says later in the video (on the topic of free speech), endless talking-head debates are a trap. They're containment — they go nowhere, and accomplish little except wasting time and energy. (Yes, not exactly a fitting attitude for participating in this space, but I've personally got plenty of time to waste, and haven't found better places to spend my energy — indeed, I had a Sunday question about a week ago relevant to this.)
It's more layered. There's autocomplete which like someone else here found doesn't work for presidential candidates.
But also: Google absolutely buries sites with the wrong political valence in search results. What Yandex will give you on the 1st page, Google will push down to 17, easily. IIRC, to the point of not even indexing certain sites.
So people don't use Google. Or DuckDuckGo which is almost as bad. Bing is usually better, Yandex doesn't do any outside of Russia suppression I'm aware of, but doesn't clean out bot results as well.
I agree it shouldn't be debated. Everyone should know that Google fucks with your search results and you have to use anyone else on anything political. Especially stuff that's not 'containment'.
More options
Context Copy link
...remind people that relevant truths remain relevant, duh?
This seems far more like an appeal to fatalism than an argument. You re-issue safety reminders regularly not because 'things be dangerous yo' should be news to anyone, but because there are a lot of reasons people may not be thinking of it at a specific context- whether they are districted, unfamiliar with a specific context, or they've just forgotten. You warn people that the stove is hot not because the idea that heat = pain is novel, but because they may not notice the stove is on / they are drifting dangerously close.
You also remind people that other people do not love them / hate them so that they are appropriately on guard, less likely to expose themselves to bad faith actors, and spare themselves the many harms and heartbreaks that can come with emotionally investing in the wrong people. And you do this regularly, because people are stupid / the heart wants what the heart wants / people always vulnerable to emotional appeals or deliberate manipulations which bad-faith actors know to use. If anyone has figured out a way to perfectly protect people via one pro forma briefing that people have to sit through, they're keeping the secret very closely, and everyone else has to regularly revisit topics and refresh awareness and retrain on already trained things.
Even setting aside that the human population is not eternal and static and not holding the sum total of human knowledge in their heads, and thus new people are learning new things every day, 'it is not novel' is not the same as 'it is not news-worthy.'
Daily life in our modern world isn't enough to do that?
And still, much like "raising awareness" in general, this isn't actually doing something about the issue.
Edit: I'd recommend watching the whole video. Hopping over and over from outrage to outrage — one day "I can't believe [X] did this!", the next "I can't believe [Y] did this!" — is not productive. It is, in Parvini's metaphor, just so much slop for the right wing proles to lap up like fat, dumb pigs at a trough. Focus on the whole, not the individual minor incidents. Fight the disease, not the symptoms. And, again, don't vent online — do something.
Given the routine failures of people on a daily basis in the modern world, obviously not, unless your daily life includes daily reminders as to why things are they way they are, which it generally does not.
Raising awareness is always a prerequisite for doing something about an issue, whether to advance an agenda when you have the power to, or to resist the imposition of an agenda when you don't.
Hence why the common anti-resistance tactics to undermine resistance often start at countering awareness. This can be by denying there is anything to resist (this doesn't happen), obfuscate coordinated or concurrent efforts (no one is trying to make this happen), and to denigrate even minor opposition as futile and pointless effort that should not be pursued (you can't change it and so shouldn't bother doing anything anyway).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link