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.

This is my bugbear so I'll say it again - because nobody's willing to bite the bullet.

If you consider human-caused climate change an imminent existential threat, you turn industrializing nations to glass using weapons of mass destruction, or any such weapon that has an outsized kill ratio to effort and value cost. You then promise to do the same to any society that rises above subsistence farming. It's not worth the risk that some guy might mine some coal and maybe build a steam engine. AI doomers, take note - if you're not willing to do this, as insane as Big Yud's missile strike proposal sounded in practice - then it's basically a moot point.

People are not rational beings. They are also content to offload any negative costs onto others as long as their own lifestyle and pleasures can be sustained - this is what winning means.

Currently, it can be best understood as a big political stick to beat people they don't like, because it exposes them to barely any political risk while offloading the problems onto their outgroup. You could address the political risk, but doing so requires more information than can easily fit in a tweet or soundbyte. This is a drug greater than any the pharmaceutical industry can ever produce; it combines the pleasure of feeling superior and self-righteous with that of making others suffer.

AI doomers, take note - if you're not willing to do this, as insane as Big Yud's missile strike proposal sounded in practice - then it's basically a moot point.

Yep, absolutely. For Butlerian Jihad to work, there has to be total escalation dominance, where trying to build AGI is banned everywhere, and any government that doesn't enforce that ban is knocked over and replaced with one that will. If a great power tries to not enforce it, the RoW has to have the willingness to go all the way:

RoW: You aren't enforcing the AI ban.

GP: Fuck you, we'll do what we want.

RoW: If you don't start enforcing the AI ban, we'll nuke you.

GP: If you nuke us, we'll nuke you back.

RoW: We know, but being nuked isn't as bad as getting exterminated by AI, so we've got nothing to lose.

GP: You're bluffing.

RoW: *launches nukes*

That's the goal line. Nothing short of that mindset will work, even if in practice I suspect that it could be implemented without requiring an actual nuclear war due to the limited number of great powers that need to get on board or decide not to force the matter (I have essentially zero hope that it could be implemented without war at all, but I think it could plausibly be just a few small and notoriously-defiant countries which have to be knocked over).

If you consider human-caused climate change an imminent existential threat,

I'm not going to go into the rest of your post, but as an environmentalist I don't think climate change is an imminent existential threat. First of all, there's nothing imminent about it - the process has already started. 2023 is the hottest year on record, and the previous holder of that esteemed title was 2022. Climate change is not some threat that could appear off in the distance, but a present reality. Coral reefs are bleaching, currents in the oceans and atmosphere are changing, ice is melting and the sea-level is rising. All of this is happening right now and if you live in the right places you can just go stick your head out of the window and see it.

At the same time, it isn't really that existential of a threat - if you're talking about humanity as a whole. If you want a good article which explains what I think is the most realistic evaluation of climate change outcomes, I recommend https://www.ecosophia.net/riding-the-climate-toboggan/

How exactly do you propose that a society of subsistence farmers build WMDs?