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 -
It seems like the recent uptick in crime has a large component of crime committed by homeless addicts, especially on the East coast. If you are naturally left-leaning, you might be interested in Michael Shellenberger's thoughts on this topic. This whole video is good, but I have queued the link up to the part where he discusses the central idea: https://youtube.com/watch?v=5nSBmftZ1qU&t=903
Shellenberger is very compassionate and a natural born leftist, but he understands the facts that (1) addicts living in the street are there because of an ongoing sequence of foolish decisions whose net effect is that they have lost control of themselves, and (2) the interventions necessary to get them back on their feet necessarily involve both carrots and sticks. He has some fairly concrete policy recommendations that he makes in the video. My sense is that he has so much conviction to actually solve the problem that he doesn't let himself be blinded by ideology, and his suggested approach combines the best aspects of the political left and right.
In any case, suppose I have an idea that I believe is better than the status quo. Then what? My philosophy on this has two parts. First, a soldier at war is not responsible for winning the war; he is responsible for doing his duty in the effort to win the war. Similarly, when it comes to public policy, I am not responsible for changing the world; I am responsible for (1) not being part of the problem, and f(2) doing my duty in being part of the solution. My duty is to work intelligently to change hearts and minds. Working intelligently means working in groups and through institutions -- and on this topic I would refer you to Teddy Roosevelt's essay "The Duties of American Citizenship", and to the final segment of Ronald Reagan's farewell speech.
In my opinion, if, over the course of your life, you help five people get closer to truth, you are a superhero.
More options
Context Copy link