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 -
...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