site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 19, 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.

5
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

That’s a terrible idea.

  • It doesn’t erode the 2A so much as demolish it.
  • Same for the 1A, which has made the government awfully reluctant to assign penalties to party membership.
  • It’s strategic suicide for any coalition which cares, at all, about centrists and swing voters.
  • It’s literal suicide in the sense of telling bad actors “come oppress me!”
  • Registered Democrats are already less likely to own guns, so they’re getting diminished returns.
  • The tribal part of our monkey brains sees it as a humiliation.

Seriously, I initially read this as a straw proposal, written so you could call your outgroup hypocrites for not eating the shit sandwich. Since you’re apparently genuine, though, I can only propose a more mild alternative.

Let’s set up zones where guns are heavily restricted. To minimize the Constitutional damage, we’ll make them inconvenient rather than outright banned. We won’t tie it to party, either, dodging 1A objections. Because the zones are limited, we get to keep our coalition; the moderates can just migrate elsewhere. We’ll try to mitigate the crime incentives with alternative policing or, when that fails, harsher state action. The federalized nature of these zones lets registered Democrats choose to live in places with fewer (legal) guns without trampling everyone else’s rights quite so badly.

What do you think?

Isn't that just how places like Chicago and NYC work now?

Precisely.

I think the OP is being a bit unreasonable by ignoring the ways in which blue tribers do, in fact, implement rules that mostly affect themselves.

Yeah sorry wasn't sure if you were going for an "exxxaccttlllyyyy" moment.