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 -
I think your comment is a bit dismissive of my point (or at least the point I attempted to make). Merely 'ugly' buildings are not at issue here. This communist architecture is not attempting to make buildings which are merely ugly, or buildings which meet a particular aesthetic that all non-communists agree is ugly.
Rather, they are making weapons. Every aspect of the design is specifically selected to cause disharmony and discomfort along all conceivable dimensions. Real factories are designed to maximize output (and ideally safety). Every single aspect of the factory is designed and tested to achieve that goal. The worker has 10 square feet of space, because he needs 10 square feet of space to do his job effectively and safely. Any more or any less and his output decreases or accidents increase. The lighting is such that he can do his job, but its not so much that it damages his eyes or gives him such a headache that he cant work. At least that is the goal.
If Eisenman or other such socialists designed this factory, every single choice would be made based on what caused the greatest degree of disharmony and psychic pain. If they had the data to determine the geometry most likely to create discontent among the workers sufficient to spark a riot or a labor strike, or cause the workers to divorce their wives or leave their churches or abandon their nations, they would build it. As Eisenman said, it is a moral imperative for them to maximize those effects.
Its not 'ugly buildings are bad.' Its 'these people are putting immense resources into harming you and everyone you know and everything you love.'
More options
Context Copy link