site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 9, 2024

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.

8
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Things that are obvious and intuitive to one camp - “it’s wrong for police to treat you roughly you just because you’re being an uncooperative asshole to them” or “police are authoritarian bullies who must be vigilantly critiqued to prevent them from abusing their power” - are totally alien and clearly wrong to the other camp.

As someone that's generally not much of a fan of the police, it remains wild to me that people aren't capable of viewing an incident and electing to believe that there isn't really a good guy in the picture. The cops in this video seem like they probably are authoritarian bullies that were unnecessarily rough because they didn't like the way Hill was acting. Nonetheless, this is easily avoided by not being a total asshole that tries to roll up your dark tinted window in their face. Personally, I would want the car impounded just for the tint even if there was no other infraction. I hate that shit. It just isn't very hard to find Tyreek Hill to be a completely unsympathetic asshole while also believing that the cops are petty authoritarians that acted unprofessionally.

This is my response to most conflicts. There is very rarely an interpersonal conflict where all parties involved act perfectly, or even with complete good faith. The cases where someone's clearly wrong, and someone's clearly right, don't make it to the public consciousness -- they don't have enough toxoplasma.

Everyone wants to think in black and white and see a victim and a perpetrator. There are certainly crimes like that, crimes of random targeting and heinous violence. But my view is that we live in a world of victimized perpetrators and perpetrating victims.

I have a little prayer I think of whenever I come across a conflict online, and find it hard to decide the truth of the situation:

I will what is good, and I do not will what is bad. If someone has done wrong, I will that they receive their recompense; if someone has been wronged, I will that they receive justice. If someone has been falsely accused of wrong, I will that the truth is known; if someone has falsely accused someone of wrong, I will that they recant. If someone is in sorrow, I will them to have joy; if someone has joy, I will that they have compassion on those who sorrow. If someone speaks falsehood, I will the pursuit of the truth; if someone speaks truth, I will that their words reach those who believe falsehood. In all places and all times, I will the good, and I do not will the bad.

Tyreek Hill's job is to catch a ball and run. The cop's job is to enforce the law. Tyreek Hill being kind of an asshole to someone who is, after all, his enemy in that moment is not nearly as concerning as the enforcers of the law being authoritarian bullies based on the slightest excuse.