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 -
I've also noticed this - I don't know how much is really down to right wingers being inherently more accepting of differing POVS as opposed to the fact that in young, educated circles leftism is the default and being willing to share right-views necessarily means having to be able to tolerate aggressive pushback.
TBH I’ve never really had a deep offline conversation about politics that were really about politics and not ultimately vibes. What I mean by that is that left, right or libertarian (have yet to meet a communist) all seem to be picking positions based on “vibes” or “culture” rather than any specific position or set of facts about the outside world. The world of politics isn’t about rubber meets the road issues, but essentially about tribe proxies forming up based on shared cultural norms and interests.
TBH this is why I don’t trust either side completely. Neither one is actually interested in fixing things or building for the future. There’s no real problem solving going on there. I’ve come to the conclusion that whether it’s D or R that eventually pull the trigger, American democracy is essentially already comatose and on life support. Politics is about solving things, filling potholes, teaching kids to be literate, numerate and scientifically literate future citizens, creating a social structure that promotes human thriving, passing real budgets, and making good decisions about how best to protect the people from enemies and keep them healthy. None of that actually seems to happen, and while the government and the parties and the people themselves are distracted by various flavors of vibes-based Kafaybe arguments, our country is rotting from within.
In 1960, the median family could afford a modest home, a car, and a local road trip vacation. That same median household probably could walk around town without worry about crime. Homelessness and drug use were fairly rare. Most kids, even without college (which was, at the time, fairly affordable) could read and write on grade level. Attacking a teacher was absolutely unheard of, and school shooters were rare enough that schools allowed kids to keep hunting rifles in their cars. Every single one of these QOL indicators has gone down quite a lot since then, and all we have from our leaders, the parties, and “political groups” is Kafaybe and Vibes.
A quality post, but I would caution you not to fall into Baby Boomer sunny day nostalgia.
In 1960, the median family was smoking, drinking, and physically fighting more. A lot of the "social order" that we yearn for today was at the expense of a lot of behind-closed-doors domestic abuse and built on the back of what was a fundamentally racist society. Furthermore, the American West was still "frontier" enough even then that if you were just kind of a trouble maker, you hopped on a train to California and, I don't know, go found Apple Computers or some shit.
Please also remember that In 1960, the median family that was black or living in greater Appalachia wasn't living that much better than the 1860 median family.
I am 100% behind the idea that a lot of social and political (and economic) ills today are because of social dysfunction. I am at the level of "As soon as you stop hearing "sir" and "ma'am" the rest is sure to follow." I think you should hold open doors for women, and that guys should pay on the first date. I will call the police on you for loud music after 9pm. My lawn need gettin' off of.
But, at the same time, fuck 1960.
We're not going back.Ah, fuck! Look what you made me do.Uh, no. I'm from greater Appalachia, TVA country. If you'd said 1920 or 1930 (I chose those dates deliberately because IMO given the choice contemporary neoliberals would've never electrified the South.) I might've agreed with you but rural white Southerners wouldn't have worshipped FDR/Truman and the Democrats 50 years past their terms if things hadn't gotten better when they were in office.
My Silent Gen grandparents were lucky to have 8th grade educations, worked in the fields as children, and went hungry such that they hoarded canned goods in their old age. My Gen X parents had 12th grade educations, didn't starve, and didn't endure child labor. People are nostalgic for the mid 20th century not just because of social mores but because we had incredible economic growth that we haven't come close to matching in the 21st century even with a giant immigration wave (Keep in mind that all that mid 20th century economic growth happened with de facto closed borders.).
Yep. My Cajun great-grandfather literally slept in a barn for years at a time. His son grew up in a house with (non-central)air conditioning.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I'd love to believe that my fellow travelers are amazing at tolerance, but I honestly believe it's the second one. For educated people, progressivism is the default. If you're going to be educated and not progressive, you need to develop your ideas and hone your beliefs, because everything and everyone around you is going to try and push you into being a progressive. If you're a young, educated conservative -- or even a moderate -- it means you're already not the kind of person who allows the Overton window to set your political beliefs. You arrived, or maintained, your conclusions in spite of the social consensus. You're a maverick.
There are definitely circles where the polarity is reversed, but for the most part you have to seek them out.
But also political liberals are more likely to report mental health problems like depression and I can't help but believe that part of it is just that political conservatives are more comfortable in their skin than progressives. And that progressives have a lot of intense fear about what conservatives might do that is shaped by an overall negative impression of the world. Which is food for thought -- progressives are often described as the bright cheery optimistic idealists, and conservatives the dark brooding fearful X-phobes... but I think the reality is much more complicated.
I think at least some of the differences in mental health are caused by the nature of the movements. Liberals tend to move further left and tear down anyone who doesn’t go along completely on everything they believe. If you take the liberal positions of 2004, you are on the far right to most social liberals. And the same group is not shy about using their power over institutions to massively punish people for pretty small transgressions. The bleeding edge of social liberalism wants Harris gone for daring to say that what Hamas did on October 7 was bad. It’s a massive purity spiral that’s easy to fall off of requiring adherents to live in a 1984 world where you have to change your views on a dime and pretend that Oceana has always been at war with Eastasia.
Conservatives are much more chill about the whole thing. If you’re conservative, you are allowed to have beliefs outside of that. As long as you’re generally conservative on most things, they don’t really care. If I’m in favor of gay marriage and my more conservative friends are not, my friends will not scream at me, nor will the more conservative kids decide that my political beliefs warrent ruining thanksgiving dinner when they throw a fit and leave. If I work for a conservative, my job isn’t in jeopardy if he finds out I’m not super conservative. There’s not really a purity spiral either. If I stand still, I’m not going to find that the party as a whole finds my views abhorrent.
More options
Context Copy link
Eh, there’s a quintile on both sides where most people hold outside the Overton window political beliefs. There are very definitely filter bubbles situated in the rightmost quintile which you can just wind up in. I live in one.
More options
Context Copy link
Indeed (progressive thought is designed by and for these people). It's worth noting that this also applies to conservatives, but the tension comes from most of the problems they solve not being fake [in the sense that their usefulness/worth/meal ticket doesn't tend to come from artificial structures (regulatory compliance, education, management, bureaucracy)].
It takes a rather unusual kind of person to notice that and reject it, though I think the rejection comes first and the noticing second (I think educated conservatives are most likely to believe their underlying skills will allow them to succeed even if the number of bullshit jobs fell by 90%, and it's more common for men to think this than women). And fixing it is not going to make you money anyway.
If I had the sense that my entire sociopolitical salary was built on a house of cards that specifically depends on the welfare of not-my-political class to sustain (and when my meal ticket comes from taxing them, and when new positions open up for my talents it's funded by/in the service of yet another new tax) I'd be utterly terrified too. I think progressives have an innate sense of this (hence the need for the hostility and the suppression); though the capacity for resistance ironically might be conservative propaganda that progressives are buying into.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link