site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3mo ago (text post)   34135 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 29, 2024

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.

9
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The problem is completely and entirely brought on intentionally by the people in power, who enforce policies of releasing criminals without punishment or simply allowing them to commit crimes uninterrupted.

This is only a small facet of the problem though, otherwise how do you explain all the many cities around the world with lower imprisonment rates and lower crime rates both?

Fewer criminally-inclined people in the first place.

NYC is much safer than other cities with similar demographics.

Every American city is dramatically safer than it was in the 1970's, even if the demographics haven't improved.

It really is possible to reduce violent and property crime by an order of magnitude relative to the demographic-driven baseline (compare crime committed by Jamaicans in Jamaica to crime committed by Jamaicans in the UK) through effective policing backed up by swift and certain punishment of criminals. Most Western European and 1st-world Asian cities do this.

I have no idea why other American cities can't get their "crime per member of a high-crime ethnic group" numbers down to NYC levels, but the problem doesn't appear to be fixable by electing Republicans or tough-on-crime Democrats at the local level.

One thing I do think is that the easiest way to reverse the recent trend in shoplifting is to clamp down on the large tech companies running online marketplaces for obviously stolen goods.

I don’t think these crime statistics really capture the picture. How often are things even reported? In NYC many quality of life offenses have blended so deeply into the noise of city life that nobody will report it because it’s not a serious crime.

If a psychotic drug zombie is screaming at me on the subway platform about wanting to stab me and how he could kill me, is that a crime? Actually yes, it’s technically an assault under NY State law. Will anybody report it? LOL

Repeat this ad nauseam and you see how crime statistics are low but there is a massive degradation in quality of life

Based on my experience as a tourist in the US, general disorder and quality of life crime is still lower in Manhattan than in the centres of most other US cities (thinking about it, I think the Vegas strip and immediate environs was nicer). Compared to a northern European or 1st-world Asian city, NYC is a bit grubby. San Francisco is filthy.

Every American city is dramatically safer than it was in the 1970's, even if the demographics haven't improved.

Yes, but this was done largely by putting criminals in penal institutions.

I have no idea why other American cities can't get their "crime per member of a high-crime ethnic group" numbers down to NYC levels, but the problem doesn't appear to be fixable by electing Republicans or tough-on-crime Democrats at the local level.

Why not? That's how NYC did it.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats