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 -
This may be a case of liberal progressives having their cake and eating it too. Non-profits can continue to help with a Delegitimize SCOTUS Campaign while municipal governments can accept the court's ruling that allows them to deal with a problem they had been forbidden from dealing with. The Republican SCOTUS made homelessness illegal message still gets sent by media, NGOs, and activists. I predict we will not see many successful city political campaigns run on "bring back the encampments" message. If you do see this campaign then you'll have your answer as to where the voter preferences lie.
I searched and found previous Motte discussion when the ruling came out. "It will be interesting to see whether this leads to rapid improvement in the homeless schizo situation in big West Coast cities." Maybe?
Getting to a point where authorities can offer you a choice to go to jail, or in a Christian shelter, or another town has potential to be a huge improvement for the West Coast. I'm not mean spirited about it. More deprogramming programs. Good. That homeless people require sleep thus can sleep wherever, but only being homeless bestows this protected status/privilege, seems not-very-constitutional. Sotomayor said cities could still regulate fire in public spaces, but don't homeless people also have a biological need to not freeze to death?
I support the charity of Americans to reach the homeless population and provide them a place to sleep. Broadly, if some of us have the right
not be cruelly and unusually punished forto camp out in a public space indefinitely, then this should be a freedom all Americans share. On a more practical level, enforcement seems like a necessary part of every step of the process: remove vagrants, offer them a place somewhere safe, force decisions upon them, and attempt to get them off the streets. This is not Freedommaxxing, but if the courts say the Constitution prohibits cops from moving anyone sleeping in places, that'd be fine too.More options
Context Copy link