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 -
Absolutely not. At least in EU, state capacity is the lowest it's been since 1800.
Everything is wrapped in red tape. Nothing can be done fast. British were recently found to have wasted 500k pages on a planning application. Oh - that was debunked, it was only 63000 pages.. Been 9 years and 260 million pounds though. On a planning application.
Granted, EU is not this bad, that's Britain, but Europe is still pretty screwed and there's no indication the worst offenders - judges, courts and activists that basically decide what the law is are going to be removed. Most salient example is that removing undesirables is impossible in Germany and France, both countries have hundreds of thousands of people ordered to leave who are still there, committing crime and iirc also collecting welfare.
The power structure is currently occupied by declaring its few citizens willing to speak up for their own interests are dangerous far-right radicals. Yes, and as always trying to pass chat-control. New round of that idiocy in december.
Didn't it take something like a decade for the new Berlin airport to open after construction was completed?
What happened to Prussian efficiency?
Prussia hasn't existed since '47. Modern Germany has vastly different legal system and ethos. I guess it died with that.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Feels like this is hefty hyperbole or you are taking a very narrow view of state capacity. States in the 1800s were much, much simpler; even 100 years ago, the populations of western European nations were considerably smaller than they are now. Universal healthcare, pensions and wider welfare were all post-WW2 inventions. Regardless of whether these are good things, they are absolutely colossal administrative tasks.
In transport, 19th century nations were able to quickly roll out train and canal infrastructure, but they were building over nothing and there was very little in terms of good road networks and air traffic was yet to exist. Modern nations are running much larger transport networks with far more participants.
In infrastructure, national electricity networks were pretty much not a thing until post-WW1. Now there are grids crisis crossing nations with far more complex load balancing and generation mixes.
Universal education was another thing that didn't exist until the late 19th/early 20th century, and even once it was introduced the years spent and scale of schools needed were much smaller than today.
I think the reason for the poor view of modern state capacity can be mapped to a divergence in capacity and complexity. If you took 1800 as a starting point, you would see capacity grow with basically constant, linear growth, whereas complexity is exponential. Thus, there was a long period where capacity had a healthy gap to complexity, but eventually complexity surpassed state capacity and the gap has only grown. So even though absolute capacity is higher than it ever was, it looks like governments are incapable as the scale of challenges has grown a lot faster.
Ok, lot of countries were quite primitive in 1800. But ability of states to get things done has taken a big nosedive since WW2 at the very least.
These are not good things. Pensions are basically declaring "we don't care about the future, we're going to bleed reproductive age people". They were invented in an age of rapid population growth. Now they're eating up state finances. The entire European social state model is hardly sustainable. Also pensions are.. much older..
Bismarck started with it in late 1880s, when the average person died 2 years before they could collect any, and there were cca 8x more young people than old.
I don't know where you live, but I don't expect to get any pension other than symbolic, and wouldn't expect it even if I were paying lot more taxes. Government debt is always increasing and economic growth is unlikely or impossible. AI is something to be regulated, not used, industry is a dirty word and energy is supposed to be expensive to "save the planet".
Look at the tempo of railway construction in 19th century. A feat like that is unimaginable today. Or how much of Europe was built then. Now much of Europe has unaffordable cost of housing because we can't or won't build.
Seeing as vast majority of university graduates use nothing whatsoever from their degrees, and it's purely a credential proving they can sit down & study, a lot of it is pure inefficiency. Same for universal high school.
The capacity of a state is orthogonal to the merit of its actions. A lot of people would say that wars and the ability to conduct military actions are a bad thing, but everyone understands that a strong military is indicative of state capacity. Likewise welfare and education. These are massive administrative challenges that modern governments handle fairly well.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
That's high state capacity, not low. The state has great capacity to stop anyone from building anything. Low state capacity would be if despite their best efforts they could not stop it.
"Is able to threaten to destroy a building with sufficient credibility that nobody invests a large sum of money building it" is a very, very low bar. "Is able to build the things it wants to build" is a much higher bar.
Nimbystan has higher state capacity than countries which can't prevent unauthorised construction at all, but lower state capacity than countries that can choose whether or not to build things and execute on either decision.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link