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 broadly agree with your points, but I think you fail to take into account just how much your perception of Trump's changes are already "through the goose" by the time you form them. You're trying to form opinions of how Trump is acting, but you're really forming opinions about how Trump's actions are being reported and presented to you. This is true regardless of where you get your information from, unless you are basing it purely on personally attending Trump rallies.
-- Trump "leaks" are still a constant feature of the more TRS themed accounts I see on Twitter, and on the rare occasion I wander onto Slate or listen to a libtard podcast. The "leaks" have always been low quality information, frequently entirely falsified and often stretched beyond recognition. "Trump reportedly 'furious' about JD Vance pick foisted on him by sons." Without even lying, that anonymous source can be exaggerating a single sarcastic comment about Vance, exaggerating the role the sons played in choosing Vance, etc. Which the writer again exaggerates to the limit of journalistic integrity. The leaks haven't stopped, but they're being reported less in mainstream press.
-- While they backslide (see the recent Arlington kerfuffle) the Cathedral seems to have realized collectively that there is no new scandal that can really harm Trump or help Harris. The public has been immunized from Trump scandal, he's been accused of so much and proven to do so much that there's no new act of crassness, tastelessness, selfishness, that can move the needle. Trump's frequent outbursts would have been reported as Scandals in 2016, like when he seemed like he was cheering on the guy who tried to break into the press-box at a rally and then went into a bizarre soliloquy about two flags forming angels wings as he was shot at. That didn't really make the news for long this year, but he's still doing it. The scandals and bizarre behavior haven't stopped, they're just being deemphasized in reporting on the topic.
-- Trump fans seem grimmer. In 2016 Trump fans were having fun, in 2020 they were angry, in 2024 they mostly seem grimly determined. In 2016 they were playing, in 2024 it's a death march. Where in 2016 bizarre Trump comments were memed to the moon, in 2024 there's a half-hearted effort to defend it followed by a shrug and "I'm voting for him anyway because something-something groomers." So you're not hearing the bizarre sayings get amplified by his fans.
All of those points are notable in themselves, and point to a changing environment, but it's not all down to a rate-change in Trump's behavior. He is still perfectly capable of everything he did in 2016 and 2020.
C'mon, man. You know better.
You're right, I should have specified the podast, in my mind I was referring specifically to Pod Save America or Political Gabfest, but as written it's too broad.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
This idea has crept into my mind over the last week. I think MAGA is limping on fumes (to mix some ambulatory metaphors). MAGA folks in 2016 had energy and vitality. Today, it feels like embattled victim mentality and a kind of Hold The Alamo grim determination.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link