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 -
That's about it, yes. Given that the latest news is that they looked for a person whose cat was eaten, they found a person whose cat was eaten, and the cat was fine.
I guess time will tell. But we've seen a few too many of this "only a bigot would say that" cases turning into a "hate fact", that I think the reaction of your side is unwarranted, even if you don't believe the claim.
People on this forum are saying out loud "it doesn't matter if the cat story is real or significant, what matters is baiting the dems into drawing attention to the Haitian Question". What is it, then, if not a "hate fact"?
I mean, a "hate fact" has to be a fact. Like various favored minorities being disproportionately responsible for various crimes, puberty blockers not being reversible, or there not being (m)any guardrails on the transition process of kids. If this turns out to be "some Haitian, somewhere, ate a cat once", it's lame, Trump / Vance shouldn't have said it, and people responding with "it doesn't matter if it's true, if it 'started a conversation'" is cope, it's the same tactics progressive activists are using.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link