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 -
For that instance specifically, and with the benefit of hindsight, I’d tell them to join for the arms and training.
In this instance, what exactly is keeping your tribe from rising in the ranks of institutions? Especially given that you already were there. Is it some analogue of the patriarchy or institutional racism?
If you want to describe it in those terms, sure! Obviously it's hard to get ahead in a system that is full of people that revile you, there's no mystery.
More options
Context Copy link
The machanisms may vary, but CRT / DEI workshops and diversity statements are a popular one. There's also people in charge of hiring / recruiting being able to sniff out someone with an unsanctioned worldview / insufficiently enthusiastic about the current civic religion. It's not 100% effective of course (I think "only" 90+% in case of academia) but whoever slips through the cracks can be dealt with easily.
I will say this could be an effective strategy if opposition was more more coordinated, but it's not like the regime doesn't know that, and doesn't crack down on any sign of coordination.
Everything you’re describing is:
A result of one side participating in civic institutions with the express goal of changing it from within, i.e “the long march through the institutions”. A communist in 1950’s America would have said the same thing as you, about not being allowed to ruse in the ranks. Now look at how their ideology has spread to the upper echelons of your society. Zoomed out, this is proof against your claims
Not an actual hard cap on any person rising through the ranks, just a difficulty. Again, see how the Marxists did it.
Because of 1 and 2, reversible in the long term. It requires actual work, sacrifice and ideological commitment but over the long term you can get there. Like I said, though, you won’t get there by lying down.
I'm somewhat skeptical that this is how it panned out historically. Communists now will still deny that their people have any influence in academia, so I'm not sure I how seriously I should take what they said in the past. Also, if they idea is conservatives abandoned academia in favor of business, the military, and the police, and participating in institution is supposed to keep them on your side / allow you to take them over - how did we lose business, the military, and the police?
Marxists, operated in an environment where academia was preaching free speech. The moment they took over, they (wisely) denounced that principle. It completely changed the environment, and they probably did it with specifically to avoid their tactics being used against them.
Anything is reversible in the long term, and anything worth fighting for will require actual work and sacrifice. I'm just doubtful of whether enlisting as an enthusiastic foot-soldier in the enemy's army is a viable tactic.
More options
Context Copy link
I don't think Marxists is a perfect analogy, but you make some good points and I can kind of see things playing out in the way you describe.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link