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 don't think anyone here is against cars for long distance travel.
I am not against car ownership. Mostly just use of cars for urban transport. I have done that drive too; Niagara falls to NYC.
yeah............sigh. You know that's what they thought when they had 20 lanes right ?
Cars are good for a lot more than "long distance travel". They're good for everything longer than a short walk, and if you need to carry anything they're good for shorter things. Even in areas with heavy traffic they're usually faster than mass transit, unless there's a direct single-seat mass transit route between the two.
There's no inherent limit. It's like razor blades, you can always add one more.
Many people oppose car culture on aesthetic grounds. Endless stretches of ugly black asphalt violate the natural landscape to a much greater degree than a stone path or railroad tracks. Cars are ugly and the US’ increasingly lower IQ population can’t be trusted to drive them without hurting other people. I don’t see why there need to be any other arguments against cars (although there are many). They look ugly, highways look ugly, drivers can’t be trusted to drive them, and I don’t care if people have to suffer a little more to live in a more aesthetically pleasing society. This shit is fucking ugly, that fat Walmart fans might no longer get to the drive-thru Wendy’s to stuff their piggy faces as fast doesn’t concern me.
“Cars are more efficient”. So what? Drinking Soylent is more efficient than cooking real food. Doing intensive cardio by yourself is more efficient than playing sports. Talking to your family on FaceTime is more efficient than going to visit them. Wearing the same vest and sweat pants every day is more efficient than putting effort into one’s appearance. Car opponents dislike the aesthetics of cars and car infrastructure above else. It is ugly and it is ugly everywhere in the world.
I see lots of people downvoted you, but I'm right there with you. At least in spirit, although I'd to see a longer effort-post acknowledging the pros and cons of this. I hate how so much of our American society is engineered towards convenience, and people treat aeshetics as if it doesn't matter at all. I think that's part of the reason so many tourists fly to Europe or Japan, is just so they can bask in the aesthetics of walking around a low-car city that looks nice.
More options
Context Copy link
Why do you think either cars or highways are ugly, as opposed to railroad tracks and trains? Why is a parking lot uglier than a railway station? Do you want to cram a low-IQ population into mass transit?
Highways are more chaotic than train tracks - they have to make 100 000s of units play nice together instead of maybe 100 trains. No road rage on train drivers that I've heard of, either. Trains are uniform, a parking lot is a mishmash of (rather boring, can't even be called a rainbow) colors.
I was under the impression that mass transit is absolute shit in USA and that's why you have to "cram" people in it. Also, where exactly would you rather the "low IQ population" go? I sure wouldn't like to share the road with their cars if they're as bad as you're putting it...
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It's less ugly in most places; my understanding is that "stroads" are much more common in the US and Canada than they are elsewhere. The big roads in Australia are largely freeways (i.e. no normal intersections, increasing safe speeds), and they're either hoisted into the sky or sunk into trenches (for noise reduction, I believe), which means you're rarely looking at huge stretches of asphalt (they also have massive green areas around and in the middle of them for safety).
More options
Context Copy link
These aesthetes should find an ivory tower to live in, high above the plebians in the cars. We'll try not to let you know how the food gets there.
The commercial area at Breezewood, PA is ugly, sure. So is the Port of Los Angeles. So is the Bingham Canyon Mine. Or any number of undistinguished sewage treatment facilities. These are the things that make the world work, regardless of whether aesthetes think they're pretty or not.
More options
Context Copy link
Obligatory reminder that the reality of that photograph is significantly less objectionable
It’s still very, very ugly, especially if you gaze both ways on the highway and then look around.
More options
Context Copy link
Telephoto lenses are a propagandist's best friend. https://petapixel.com/2020/05/02/controversial-photo-of-crowds-on-ca-beach-was-shot-with-a-telephoto-lens/
And more recently relevant, that Harris crowd pic
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link