site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   30012 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 21, 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
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The amount of energy being expended over Trump's recent visit to a McDonald's is kind of interesting to me. It seems to have generated an extraordinary amount of media and online attention. On the supporter side, they are hailing it as a brilliant and deeply meaningful activity, simultaneously trolling Harris and celebrating the dignity of unskilled labor, and generating deeply Americana visuals. On the detractor side, they decry it an illogical and bizarre stunt, that it was fake because the store was not actually open, and compared it to Dukakis in the tank. Some have even doxxed the owner who wrote to the state to complain about labor regulations.

Meanwhile, McDonald's corporate HQ sent what I think is a very good memo to franchisees explaining the value of their goal of political inclusivity and how that manifests as allowing visits from anyone who asks and being proud of being important to American culture.

I think this is interesting because symbolically, it's something that cleaves much more at the red tribe/blue tribe dichotomy than the Democrat/Republican one. I think a lot of blue-tribers disdain McDonalds and consider it trashy, but can't really say so too loudly because the poorer members of their political coalition enjoy it. Trump has been mocked in the past for having the poor taste of actually liking McDonald's food as well as catering a White House dinner with it, widely seen as trashy and disrespectful. The imagery of Trump looking for all the world like a store manager from 3 decades ago I think also triggered some nostalgia - or perhaps post-traumatic stress - about the current state of customer service.

I don't have too much more to say and offer no predictions. It just seemed interesting as one of those things that seemed to trigger something unexpected in people for reasons that go way beyond the substance of the actual event, and figuring out what's resonating with people in either a positive or negative way, and possibly why, seems like a good path towards predicting future trends.

On the supporter side, they are hailing it as a brilliant and deeply meaningful activity, simultaneously trolling Harris and celebrating the dignity of unskilled labor, and generating deeply Americana visuals.

As someone who is either voting Trump or whatever semi-retard the Libertarian Party is trotting out (Has Dave Smith fixed the party yet??), I really don't think your portrayal of this is what even a small % of Trump voters think. It's kind of like how journalists take a tweet from someone with 120 followers and make a statement out of it. Tho I admit I don't know who the twitter personal is - but 11k likes, with half of them being paid for, is just noise. I'd understand this post more if you just thought this, like, instead of showing a random tweet.

I also don't think poor people rejoice in McDonald's anymore - we used to with 29 cent burgers and 39 cent cheese burgers twice a week.

It's a (former?) sometimes poster on this forum, which is why I tagged that user. However, I saw much the same sentiment among more prominent supporters, e.g., Matt Walsh.

I also don't think poor people rejoice in McDonald's anymore - we used to with 29 cent burgers and 39 cent cheese burgers twice a week

Clearly, lots of people are eating there, and I don't think it's the upper middle class.

McDonalds IS trashy though. Literally bugman food.

I mean-- okay-- I grab 40 nuggets sometimes and devour them like a starving caveman introduced to high fructose corn syrup. But also I literally drink soylent so I think I know what I'm talking about here.

It is actually a scandal that a member of the elite should publicly prefer such garbage, low rent food. It would be fine if he just liked it, but it should be a dirty secret instead a publicity stunt.

it should be a dirty secret instead a publicity stunt.

That's the joke.

Trump is simultaneously thumbing his nose at elite norms, calling out the Harris Campaign's cynical attempt to curry favor with min-wage workers, and reinforcing his own brand as "a man of the people".

The louder out-of-touch members of the PMC class sneer and complain it, the more effective it becomes as a PR stunt. See @jeroboam's bit about "hacking the media"

Mcdonalds is not trashy, its also not classy, it just is. It is food that is scientifically engineered to taste good, so denying it does taste good just makes you a liar. Is it also bad for you? Actually controversial. Compared to something like an impossible burger, a mcdouble comes out ahead. Sure the fries are very calorie dense, but that is the potato for you. You can do worse, such as buying wonder or other store stable breads.

The currency exchange is trashy. Lloyds of London is classy. A lot of things exist on the spectrum between them, and Mcdonalds is probably almost exactly in the middle. Maybe trashy people eat there more than classy people, but basically everyone does eat there from time to time because it provides consistency. I rarely get coffee before work, but when I do, Mcdonalds is the most convenient close option. And reasonably priced.

It's scientifically engineered to be addictive, not good. There's a difference. McDonalds food near-universally tastes like salty cardboard. And it's that very addictiveness that makes it bad for you-- modern food is terrible not merely on some "heart disease % per gram" scale, but because its hyperpalatable nature goads your lizard brain into eating way too much of it.

And ironically it's not reasonably priced-- unless you're talking about the coffee specifically, maybe. McDonalds prices aare comparable to much better restaurants unless i go through the rigamarole of getting the app and buying their deals. And since time and not-being-advertised to both have value, on net McDonalds is a bad deal.

To be fair, the only thing I get is the coffee and the dollar menu hamburger (which is now $1.50). These are still good deals.

The left doesn't hate McDonald's, or at least not anymore. It employs a lot of minorities, has many inner-city locations, and has always appealed to urban/hip sensibilities. I think there is more hate for McDonald's by the right for the whole obesity/seed oil angle. As part of the whole post-2021, post-Covid health reversal which saw the political polarity flip in terms of health culture, the left went from admonishing fast food in the early 2000s (e.g. Supersize Me) to bringing it under their coalition/fold. This is partly why they were so appalled by Trump working there; the rest because they are appalled by anything Trump does, or other reasons given.

It just seemed interesting as one of those things that seemed to trigger something unexpected in people for reasons that go way beyond the substance of the actual event, and figuring out what's resonating with people in either a positive or negative way, and possibly why, seems like a good path towards predicting future trends.

it's the trump effect, anything he does evokes a disproportionate reaction, because it's trump

Since when did the left start liking fast food?

Like is strong. They certainly have to pretend to like it because 25%+ of their voters love it and of those 25% it is one of the only jobs they can hold down.

under body positivity/fat acceptance they are indifferent to it now or see it as a personal matter . I see no evidence of leftists being opposed to to or speaking out against it. Some liberals, yes, but not leftists.

Note how this photo op is in McDonald’s interests. There’s been a huge shift online against “slop” and seed oils, overwhelmingly among young conservatives (one of the weird role reversals in recent years, along with young conservatives criticizing the military and vaccines). Making a big display of Trump serving the slop winds up associating Trump with McDonald’s in a nostalgic, Home Alone cameo kind of way, which improves their image among at at-risk demographic. The Democrats who care so much that they are willing to forego McDonald’s are few and far between, and no one will remember it in a few months anyway. But McDonald’s meanwhile gets a stupid amount of advertising. Whether the spectacle was a farce, insensitive, an homage to Americana, whether Kamala really worked there — McDonald’s is the constant in the controversy.

Trump cooking and serving food at McDonalds, and taking instruction and orders from a teenage manager reminds me greatly of Saturnalia

The holiday was celebrated with a sacrifice at the Temple of Saturn, in the Roman Forum, and a public banquet, followed by private gift-giving, continual partying, and a carnival atmosphere that overturned Roman social norms: gambling was permitted, and masters provided table service for their slaves as it was seen as a time of liberty for both slaves and freedmen alike.

Trump submitted himself to a humbling role reversal. Was it brief? Sure. Was it "staged"? I mean, on a scale from "The grill is off and the meat is raw" to "Actually worked an 8 hour shift", I'd rate it a 2.5? Maybe as high as a 4? I think, like Saturnalia's role reversal, it's symbolically important.

According to some sources, there is (or was, back when conscription was 2 years and dedovschina was more prevalent) a similar role reversal day in some Russian army bases among conscripts, where the "older" conscripts took on the roles of the novice ones. According to the same sources, this role reversal was not very humbling - none of the novices would dare to subject the "granddads" to the same tribulations they were subjected to, because the next day everything would be back to normal.

I don't know if the slaves in Rome were much consoled by Saturnalian symbolic role reversal. Did they have the presence of mind to think "the master will just go back to his usual oppressive self tomorrow"? Perhaps. Could they state it out loud?

If my leaders are going to put on airs of being worldly, I want them to keep the pretense up for more than one day a year.

In the US military, there's a tradition of senior leaders serving food for a single meal, like Thanksgiving or Christmas dinner. Example 3-Star Admiral serving Thanksgiving dinner. In my 20-year Navy career, I have never heard anyone be critical of someone's choice to participate in this sort of event. I heard (and contributed to) whining as a Junior Officer because our CO decided the entire Wardroom would be doing it, but in the end we all did it and enjoyed ourselves. I have heard multiple sailors complaining that their CO didn't do it. I have never even heard of anyone be an asshole to a senior leader serving the food, although punishments are pretty quick for unjustifiable assholery to food service workers even when they aren't Admirals.

But even when people aren't being dicks to you, I will testify that it's quite humbling to be serving food to your entire command. It's good and valuable to get your head out of the big - often intangible - problems of your regular senior job, and focus on all the little things that have to come together in order to get plates of food for a stream of sailors. It's humbling, in my experience, going from worrying about writing official memos or following up on a logistics request, into just having to deal with ensuring that there's another tray of mashed potatoes ready for when we run out of this one: you absolutely can fail at the latter even if you have a Masters degree and 70 people reporting to you. It reminds you that for all your skill and power, you're still beholden to basic reality. It brings into sharp focus how no matter how brilliantly the potatoes were ordered and shipped, no matter how cutthroat the price negotiations were, if you don't do the basics of cutting them up and putting them into a mixer, cooking them, and having them ready to go when they're needed, then its all for naught.

If human nature hasn't changed too much, I would bet Saturnalia gave the masters a similar humbling experience.

If my leaders are going to put on airs of being worldly, I want them to keep the pretense up for more than one day a year.

Isn’t one the chief complaints leveled at Trump, ever since he was a candidate the first time around, that he was/is "vulgar" and "unpresidential". I think that one of the reasons this little pr stunt has worked as well as it has is the relative lack of pretense.

it's something that cleaves much more at the red tribe/blue tribe dichotomy than the Democrat/Republican one. I think a lot of blue-tribers disdain McDonalds and consider it trashy, but can't really say so too loudly because the poorer members of their political coalition enjoy it. Trump has been mocked in the past for having the poor taste of actually liking McDonald's

I don't think PMC Turbolibs disdain McDonald's because it is lower class, I think they disdain McDonald's because it is so American. A certain kind of urban blue triber hates actually existing American traditions, they hate baseball and football and fast food drive-throughs and Christmas and guns and elections and cars with V8 engines. They hate their own families and communities, they hate where they grew up and those they grew up with, they are sure that whatever somebody else has over there is better than what we have here. How much of this is a still-lingering hatred of the jocks and preps and pretty girls from high school is left as an exercise for the reader. The crossover between self-professed progressives who hate McDonald's and self-professed rightists who hate McDonald's is where you hit horseshoe theory, where the radicals and the reactionaries run into each other, the Hlynka-point.

My wife is American-born, but her parents are immigrants while my family has been in America (and basically in our town) for generations. Sometimes the difference in traditions becomes obvious, and it has made me recognize things that are American for me.

So just after we got married, some eight years ago now, and moved in together for the first time, I mentioned one day before I left for work that I was craving macaroni and cheese, just had a yen for it. My wife, being an excellent wife, went into one of her cookbooks and made an Ina Garten recipe for a five-cheese baked macaroni and cheese, picked up really nice cheeses from Wegmans, and presented me with this delicious dish when I got home. Truly spectacular dinner, it was delicious (if so rich that it was nap inducing), she's since made the same recipe for company several times but...I did have to tell her afterward that when I said I was craving macaroni and cheese, this wasn't really what I was thinking of. I wanted the yellow, boxed, artificial Kraft stuff. My wife was pissed, she still laughs about it, she'd never had boxed mac'n'cheese as a kid, it wasn't something her family would eat, and didn't even really understand what I meant. She thought I was just insulting her cooking, saying it wasn't as good as some processed bullshit.

I'm aware that my wife's five-cheese macaroni and cheese is better, but I still sometimes crave what my mom would pop on the stove when I was a kid. Honestly, even as an adult, I sometimes buy the cartoon-character Kraft boxes, because they're better, I'm not sure if it's just the pasta shapes transporting the cheese better or if the sauce packet is formulated differently. A few days later I got the boxed stuff and made it, and she understood: this is just a totally different food, and she got why I was craving it a little.

McDonald's and Wendy's and Burger King feel the same nostalgic way to me, but McDonald's is the alpha, the icon. I don't eat a lot of fast food. It's not something I fit into my weekly diet. But it still feels nostalgic to me in a deeply Americana way, and every now and then I have a craving for it. The drive through is so American, so ingrained in my mind with memories of the road trip, or hanging out at the mall, or in the car with your friends driving around to nowhere in particular American Graffiti style. Drinking a soda, cruising down the highway, on my way to wherever, it's ingrained in my psyche.

As an aside, I remember growing up a stock stand-up comedy joke, which I literally think I remember hearing from different comedians in Dane Cook/Carlos Mencia/Bill Engvall range, went something like: you know what's so unbelievably stupid? When you see someone at a McDonald's and they order a burger, and fries and then get a diet coke! You think the DIET coke is going to keep you from getting fat?! What a DUMBASS!

And as a ten year old I laughed at the joke, because duh the diet coke didn't make any difference! What an idiot that fat person is ordering a diet coke! For some reason we all despised diet soda, it was a mockable concept.

Now, as an adult, that's exactly my ideal drive-through fast food order on that road trip. Cheeseburger, small fries just for a taste, small chicken nuggets, large diet coke. (My actual order tends to be determined by coupons and online offers) A mcdouble is 390 calories and 22g of protein, not that bad occasionally on an IIFYM scale though I wouldn't recommend living off them. A small fry isn't great but it's only 230 calories. The McNuggets are even decent: 190 calories and 9g of protein. Eliminating the sugar and empty calories from the soda is the [single best way] to improve the nutrition of an occasional fast-food indulgence! I get all my nostalgia buttons pressed for the fast food I ate as a kid, and the final result is something like 800 calories and 35g of protein, too much in the way of salt and fat and whatever bad stuff, but not going to ruin my week or anything.

Man.

Sometimes people just don't like things because the things are bad. Or, given the insane adaptability of human aesthetics, because they haven't yet found a reason to cultivate the liking. In a world of impossible luxury, is it really surprising that people's preferences don't overlap?

More importantly, does it really say anything about a more fundamental hatred? Disdain for Americana is a heuristic, a shorthand for a bunch of material and cultural luxuries. Disdain for America, or for one's family, is something else.

Sometimes people just don't like things because the things are bad.

I don't like Coldplay. I think their music is what they play in a waiting room for your vasectomy. I don't go around using Coldplay as a [prefix to indicate everything bad in the world]. Nevermind, I was going to link the wikipedia article, but the actual title of the article is too funny:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:English_terms_prefixed_with_Mc-_(derogatory)

Or, given the insane adaptability of human aesthetics, because they haven't yet found a reason to cultivate the liking. In a world of impossible luxury, is it really surprising that people's preferences don't overlap?

I don't like Hockey. I try to like hockey, pretty regularly, but I don't like it. I don't go around complaining about the NHL for existing.

Disdain for Americana is a heuristic, a shorthand for a bunch of material and cultural luxuries. Disdain for America, or for one's family, is something else.

Yet the two ideas are tied together. "I love America, but I hate everything American and want America to be completely different" has some obvious illogic to it. Patriotism is Hegelian, it's about synthesis, glorifying both sides of a conflict. The patriotic American version of the Civil War isn't the Lost Cause or Marching Through Georgia, it is both. Within that ad, the Yankees and Red Sox hate each other, but baseball wouldn't be better off without either team, it needs both, both embody part of baseball's romance and joy. As ever, the success of Augustus wasn't at core about the brutal victory of one side in the Roman civil war, but about his success in glorifying the other side as brave Romans embodying Roman values who were nonetheless mistaken. The English aristocrats who descended from William's retinue came to honor the Anglo Saxon heritage of their conquered homeland. Russian patriotism today struggles to swallow a world in which both Lenin and Alexander were admirable, but it seeks it.

American patriotism today which does not contain McDonald's and the NFL and MTV isn't, at core, patriotism, because for most Americans it doesn't contain the traditions of your literal ancestors and the people you grew up with, your teachers and scoutmasters and little league coaches and the boss at your summer job. That doesn't mean you can't dislike McDonald's. To be honest, I don't really like McDonald's. I've been to a McDonald's three times in the past two years, and once was just a drink, while another time I just bought a medium fry to get change for a fifty so I could buy a velvet painting of JFK for $30 in the parking lot. I prefer Wendy's, when I do eat fast food, which is rarely. But I understand the appeal of it. (I'll note that by my own standard I'm far from perfect: I haven't seen a superhero movie since the Toby Maguire Spiderman)

Which Alexander?

I have a stash of cheap spicy ramen noodles in my house that I get a craving for once a few months. I personally blame this on my experiences in university where after training in the evening the hot cup of noodles just kept me going and now this flavor is stamped on my soul forever.

Diet Coke is also just a completely different drink. It tastes different, even than Coke Zero.

I used to have a lot of Diet Coke in my house as a kid, and the taste is something I can recall quite distinctly.

Diet Coke was sort of the first attempt at producing a zero-calorie alternative to Coke, and years later with better technology they found they could produce something closer to regular Coke, but by then Diet Coke had its own loyal customer base that would be dangerous to offend. In my own household, my wife loves Diet Coke, while I prefer Coke Zero.

It's interesting how the original goal was to make fake Coke, but then releasing a new product that was closer to real Coke didn't entirely supplant the original fake, because the original fake now had its own specific reputation and flavor.

Diet Coke was sort of the first attempt at producing a zero-calorie alternative to Coke

Second attempt. The first was Tab, which managed to survive until 2020. Coke Zero isn't nearly as superior to Diet Coke than Diet Coke was to Tab, and the 2021 reformulation made it worse IMO.

I'm another that prefers Diet over Zero. "What I thought I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those full-calorie sodas."

Yesterday I was about to post in a topic that it seems to me that the real Trump sin is that he has the audacity of genuinely liking America. And that this just unpalatable to the vobt (vonline blue tribers). Seems you have picked up that sentiment too.

I agree with you, at times, but not at others. Trump loves America, but too often it's an America that he remembers dimly from before he was born. Patriotism is to a large extent loving what your country is, not what you imagine it was or should be.

Trump’s patriotic vision of America is like an idealized version of mid-century NYC. It’s not pastoral or even suburban.

The comparison, elsewhere in this thread, to his Home Alone cameo is relevant.

I think it was just really funny of him. It wasn't some brilliant move, it wasn't a mistake, it was just a small +EV event that's really entertaining to the internet

Meanwhile, McDonald's corporate HQ sent what I think is a very good memo to franchisees explaining the value of their goal of political inclusivity and how that manifests as allowing visits from anyone who asks and being proud of being important to American culture.

This was actually my biggest takeaway.

I had thought that the art of using Corpo-speak to avoid political landmines without being tone-deaf was lost. But somebody managed to produce a memo that carries the subtle implication "We just make food and people give us money for it, don't read anything more into it that that" without taking a side or being dismissive.

I want more of that. Just do what your company is good at. Make money, don't throw jabs along ideological lines or invite political/culture wars in.

As for the stunt itself. The reason Trump 'gets away' with this stuff is he is just that guy. I think with most politicians, we're all aware that they have a mask that they put on to perform when campaigning. That mask drops in private, and they can be nasty people with few redeeming qualities.

Trump doesn't have that Kayfabe. He is himself. If anything, he's just more Trumpy in private (or so leaked audio suggests). So there's a level of earnestness that makes this appearance less of a clearly artificial performance, although it undoubtedly is artificial. Dude actually seems pleased to be out slinging fries, rather than just getting it over with to pull a few extra votes.

For a standard politician to achieve sincerity doing this, they'd have to drop the mask. Which might be a really bad move. Trump just doesn't have a mask.

I think in the West that we're all used to politicians to being carefully managed stage shows that Trump is genuinely an outlier. He's said and done so many ridiculous things that standard retail politics is elevated to a air of authenticity. If a guy is willing to say that Haitians eats pets and illegals have bad genes in public, then saying that he's lying that he likes cooking french fries feels like bit of a stretch.

This was a brilliant publicity stunt by the Trump team, and the unhinged reaction from Redditors proves why.

As I mentioned last week, Republican candidates need to "hack the media" in order to get coverage. This is a great example. Trump comes across really well in this appearance and amplifying it can only help his campaign. If, instead, he gave a speech to talk about entitlement reform or some other boring shit, he would have gotten almost no coverage (and the coverage he did get would be purely negative).

Most elections really do come down to who is the more likeable person. Trump is in his element here and seems like a genuinely nice guy as he hands out bags of greasy food.

The people who are seething that this stunt is fake, on the other hand, come off as really dumb. Trump has been the victim of two assassination attempts. Do you think the Secret Service is going to let randoms through the drive through? Next, they'll tell us that pro wresting is also fake.

And finally there's also the added benefit that Kamala Harris claims to have worked at McDonald's but is probably lying about it.

Of course, most people have already made up their minds. But when the sole plank of the Harris campaign is that Trump is a monster, these humanizing events really undermine the narrative. Trump is now up to 62.5% on Polymarket, the highest since Biden left the race.

My suspicion is that Harris did work ad McDs, but it was in high school in Montreal. Her campaign doesn't really want to draw attention to her childhood outside the US, so they are being evasive.

That would explain a lot.

I dunno if it quite adds up -- not sure what her family income was like once she moved to California, but I know somebody who attended Westmount High with her in Montreal.

This was (and still is) if not the richest postal code in Canada, definitely top 3 -- her parents didn't not own a home because (as her campaign is trying to imply) they couldn't afford to, they didn't own a home because they were rootless university professors and moved around a lot.

This was a pretty well compensated job, and not one that engenders a "kids should have a menial summer job so they will learn the value of demeaning manual labour" type attitude.

I see no reason to think that she would have had a job at all in this period -- maybe her economic fortunes took a turn for the worse once she moved out, but I kind of doubt this too -- I didn't go to college until the early 90s, but it definitely would not have been possible to pay a significant percentage of one's schooling costs on a part-time McDonalds paycheque then; I'd think that the 80s were even worse?

I didn't go to college until the early 90s, but it definitely would not have been possible to pay a significant percentage of one's schooling costs on a part-time McDonalds paycheque then; I'd think that the 80s were even worse?

A lot of the problem with college loans reflects a growth in school costs, rather than decreasing incomes: see here for breakdowns. Demos estimates tuition for Howard University at the time of her graduation as "Tuition Then: $3,045 ($6,668 today)", aka 2016 dollars, in contrast to $23,419 in its 2016 tuition -- maybe hard to cover if you had a lot of other expenses, but at least something you could seriously dent.

Into the mid-00s, you could still do something comparable with community colleges, but these days they're pretty pricey for a full 2-year degree, and they won't get you to a 4-year.

Though in turn, a lot of the drive against students working is that the sticker-shock prices are only really getting paid by a handful of (often international) students, ameliorated by some amount of federal student aid or in-state discounts. Burnishing your college resume with extracurriculars can be much more renumerative in scholarships than slinging fries, and these programs and school workloads increasingly are incompatible with doing both.

((eg, I'm just a mentor for some FIRST programs, and they end up 25-hour jobs at times.))

Demos estimates tuition for Howard University at the time of her graduation as "Tuition Then: $3,045 ($6,668 today)", aka 2016 dollars, in contrast to $23,419 in its 2016 tuition -- maybe hard to cover if you had a lot of other expenses, but at least something you could seriously dent.

That's about the same as mine in the 90s (more like 4k/a as I recall) -- thing is, McDonalds paid even less than it did now, especially (I would think) in California.

Plenty of people (including me) had part-time (or more often, summer) jobs that were relatively menial and got by without student loans that way -- but these jobs were not pulling $5/hr shifts at McDonalds.

Minimum wage in California seems to have been $3.65 in the 80s -- if one were trying to pay for tuition (and were remotely hireable; ie. a law student) I'd think that one would find a better job?

At least in the current day, service sector work has the benefit of being relatively flexible with scheduling, and that can sometimes attract people who'd otherwise be unable to work stuff out. But especially in the 80s, yeah, it definitely wasn't the cash-maximizing option.

This was a pretty well compensated job, and not one that engenders a "kids should have a menial summer job so they will learn the value of demeaning manual labour" type attitude.

"Kids should have a summer job so they learn the value of hard work" was a completely normal viewpoint among upper-middle class parents as late as 2000 in the UK, and I assume it was so in Canada as well. It would have been even more normal when Kamela was a teen in the early 80's. I went to private school and Cambridge, and about half my social circle (myself included) were expected to get paid summer jobs by their parents, and about a third ended up doing menial jobs of the standard student-job variety. (I only know one person who worked at McDs specifically).

"Kids should have a summer job so they learn the value of hard work" was a completely normal viewpoint among upper-middle class parents as late as 2000 in the UK, and I assume it was so in Canada as well.

It was in my circles too -- but the point is that my parents actually are upper-middle class rather than literal-communist university professors, and I feel like the attitudes might be somewhat different there?

It definitely still is in Canada. I've mentioned this before here but a major part of the reason the affluent Toronto parents I talk to frequently are swinging against the federal Liberals is because none of their kids can get the typical high school jobs (fast food, grocery store, cashier, waiting tables, etc) that they expect them to get anymore.

I could still ping any of my co-workers at fast food joints and get them to corroborate that I was there, and if I ran from office they would come out of the proverbial woodwork (both good and bad on that front, perhaps). I think the fact they can't find one person who remembers working with her pretty damning.

Snopes tried their best to prove this true and still failed.

Aside from the above-mentioned news reports, there was no tangible evidence of Harris working at McDonald's as a college student. We reached out to Harris' campaign, as well as McDonald's headquarters, seeking tax records or other proof — which could include photos or videos of her working at the restaurant, employment records or physical items such as a uniform or name tag. We also reached out to Harris' sister, Maya, as well as a close friend from Howard University seeking comment, and looked for public interviews by friends or family members of Harris' to confirm the story, with no luck.

I don't think it happened.

To be fair, I would also ignore any media organ asking for comment from me on something long ago. In 2022 one reached out about an old college roommate who was running for office, and I sent the email straight to the trash.

I don't think McDonald's headquarters would respond about a private employment matter, and I'm not even sure it would have employment records from almost half a century ago.

Wouldn't the Harris campaign (who were contacted by Snopes) be highly motivated to provide some evidence for this if it were true? They couldn't find one childhood friend who said 'yeah we worked at Mickey D's together'? This has (at least for the next couple of days until the next cycle) blown up to be front and center in the presidential race.

I agree that the Harris campaign would have more motivation than anyone else. I just think this is assuming malice when incompetence is more than sufficient. Campaigns are extremely crazy internally (it's really hard to convey just how crazy they get unless you've been on one), with unclear lines of responsibility and a giant workload that you'll never get fully through. Even if they have Harris' lifetime tax records on hand (they should if they're available, but they might not be), there's no particular reason to think some intern or junior staffer would have an easy line to pass them on to Snopes. And even if they did, the expected benefit of convincing a Snopes reader that Harris worked at McDonald's might be outweighed by other considerations (giving away unrelated information that could provide avenues of attack, or just in setting a precedent).

Even the IRS doesn't keep more than a decade or so of records on hand ... but apparently the Social Security Administration does? With Form SSA-7050-F4, a $144 request for "Detailed Earnings Information" should provide a record which "Includes periods of employment or self-employment and the names or addresses of employers."

I don't see how the timing would have worked out, though. Harris mentioned working at McDonalds while campaigning in 2019, but I can't find mention of Trump calling this a lie until she brought it up at the end of this August, by which time it would have already been too late for the SSA to provide evidence. ("Please allow SSA 120 days to process", after which point you may call to "leave an inquiry" about why it still hasn't been processed, after which point I guess you just get to enjoy the sloth scene from Zootopia more.)

More comments

Have you worked in a big campaign? I think it would be fun and enlightening if you shared your experiences on the thread!

All I know comes from West Wing and I have a feeling that the reality is way more regarded than the typical mass media depiction.

More comments

Fair enough.

The New York Times has now seemed to find a friend that got told second hand by Harris's deceased mother that Harris was working there.

More comments

Nothing's impossible, although she claimed to have worked at McD's in college, not high school.

I'll say with 95% certainty that she made shit up. Even if she didn't have photos or paystubs, the Harris campaign could have at least provided approximate dates and the exact location where she worked. I could easily do that from my own menial jobs 20+ years ago. I don't know. Maybe it's a good thing for politicians and mob bosses to have a bad memory.

Edit: They did provide this info! Though none of her co-workers have come forward, it's a long time ago. On the other hand, it wasn't on her resume from 1987 nor in her memoir. I'm downgrading my probability of "made shit up" to 80%.

In the mean time, Ackman retweeted this funny dunk today:

"51 former intelligence officials say Kamala worked at @McDonalds"

Yeah, 'worked at McDonald's but can't directly confirm it because nobody cares about early fast food jobs so why would I save records of it" is definitely a story I'm willing to believe. I don't know that Canada is necessary for that story, but it would be an added wrinkle if so.

I have a lot of sympathy because I have a pretty similar story. When I was in high school I worked at {local pizza joint} that was sold to new owners and rebranded a couple years after I left. I put it on my first resume and the background check company my first employer used couldn't verify through whatever their normal means are that I worked there. I ended up having to reach out through several layers of friends to get the original owner of the place to write a letter confirming I worked there. It would have been way easier and more convenient to just leave it off. If someone wanted me to prove I worked there again today I'm not sure I could do it. Maybe a dozen people had contemporaneous knowledge and the only ones I'm still in regular contact with are my family.

Maybe social media has kept people more in touch in my generation, but I can reach out to no less than four people that are direct connections on Facebook who I worked with at McDonald’s circa 2002 when I was in high school.

I just played a round of golf with one of them about a month ago.

And I’m not even much of an extrovert, much less a politician.

I worked at a grocery store a couple of summers after you mention. I don't remember anybodies name who worked there, I have no paychecks, it's unlikely I have my tax records, there are no photos of me working there, and probably the only reason the supermarket would be able to have records of me is it's part of a giant corporate chain, not a franchisee.

Throw things back another 20 years and throw in the fact it's a franchisee, I have zero doubt Kamala could've worked there a few shifts every week and she has no real records.

I didn't think I had any paper records of working at McDonald's any longer, but on a whim logged into ssa.gov to see if they did. And they do. Employer name, address, EIN, and reported earnings are all there.

Just click "Review your full earnings record now" and then on the subsequent page "Take a closer look" to get links to details for each year.

Anyone who had a job in the 80's care to see if their records are online?

I think I can find people from about half the shitty menial jobs I worked. Entirely plausible to me that she worked at McDonald’s and doesn’t have any evidence because it was the 80’s.

I don't think that's very typical, at least assuming that you went on to college afterwards. Although all I have as evidence is a gut feeling and my own n=1 case: I worked a fast food job for six months at the beginning of college and could not have been less interested in maintaining connections with any of the people I worked with there.

The status dynamics are interesting. Having worked at McDonald's sometime in the past clearly isn't something that Democrats feel there should be shame over--regardless of the veracity of Kamala's work history, it's still something she thinks gives a boost to her resume. But the response is nevertheless unhinged.

Is it some kind of stolen valor? I'm imagining Trump stocking shelves at CostCo in a photo-op, and I doubt he'd even get any media attention. Or even doing the same exact thing at Burger King: despite being identical slop, the response wouldn't be nearly so vituperative.

It has to do with what McDonald's represents. Kamala worked at McDonald's, but it was something horrific she was forced to do, serving the lowest of the low so she could better herself. If her life is ever dramatized by Netflix, her last day there will depict her departure as she gives a soliloquy about the depravities of mass consumerist slop, corporate wage slavery, car-centric culture, and factory farming. Trump, by contrast, is not only going there voluntarily, but going there as if there were nothing wrong or shameful about going there. Anyone with his privileges doing something so declasse is breaking a code.

I think this alongside the other types of events (football games for example) are things that are coded for the lower classes, the deplorables, the kinds of people that mainline Democrats sneer at while being really patronizing about their attempts to “help”. Republicans are able to appeal to that base because they don’t sneer. They see “dirty jobs” as noble, they see doing a job that needs doing so you can meet your obligations as noble. They see the note rests and sensibilities of the working class in flyover country as worthy and beautiful. And this phot opportunity highlighted the difference between the two parties. The democrats are run by the PMC who see working class whites as beneath them. They don’t want to feel snobby so they tend to give help to minorities. The republicans are the party of doers and builders.

I think your wrong about football coding low status, I mean have you seen how expensive nfl tickets are? Plenty of wealthy high status people enjoy attending them

High-end spectator sport has always been high status. More than half the traditional British social season is spectator sport.

There is a separate issue that specific sports can acquire a lowbrow connotation (like association football in the UK for most of the 20th century) because an alternative is higher-status, but the NFL never fell into that bucket. The Ivy League is primarily an American football league, for crissakes. To a WASPy blueblood, "The Game" is a football game. (Compare the UK, where "The Varsity Match" is a rugby game).

Yeah, this seems to capture a lot of the feels.

Tucker Carlson has characterized this election as the people who talk down to others vs. those who are sick of being talked down to. And while that's obviously reductive, there's a strong element of truth there.

The Democrat says "Come with me and you won't have to go to NASCAR races and eat McDonald's any more. You can be just like me! Wouldn't that be great?". It shows a real lack of understanding about the working class and what they value. They don't do these things because they have to. They like McDonald's!

Trump, despite being raised rich, seems to get it. It's weird. I feel my own common touch fading away with every passing year.

The Democrat says "Come with me and you won't have to go to NASCAR races and eat McDonald's any more. You can be just like me! Wouldn't that be great?". It shows a real lack of understanding about the working class and what they value. They don't do these things because they have to. They like McDonald's!

This reminds me of the narrative I bought into about 20 years ago, when the left was pushing the idea that everyone, including those in the Middle East, just wanted liberal democracy (even if they weren't aware of it). So once freed from the religious oppressive forces keeping them down, they'd gravitate towards such a system like in America. Same for immigrants from such cultures, whose kids would see how awesome liberal democracy is and thus adopt its values. I particularly recall a (more recent, but still like a decade old, I think?) 5-hour long conversation between Cenk Uygher and Sam Harris about this kind of stuff, where Cenk was smugly telling Sam about how suicide bombers and other similar Muslim terrorists could just be won over with the benefits of Western liberal values.

I think the amount of epicycles that have been required to explain the various failures and speedbumps that such a narrative has encountered in the past 2 decades shows that, no, it was rather that the people who pushed such a narrative largely just lacked the ability or willingness to appreciate the true diversity of thought there exists in humans. I don't put much weight to any sort of sociological study anymore, but I suspect that the findings that liberals in America have a hard time modeling how conservatives think in a way that doesn't exist in reverse might be pointing at something that's true. Likewise for the cliche that "liberals think conservatives are evil; conservatives think liberals are stupid."

I honestly think most people simply are not good at understanding the Zeitgeist of cultures outside of their own and perhaps nearby cultures that are fairly similar. We don’t really get the MENA region because most of us are generations removed from a culture that took religion seriously. To most WEIRD people, religion is just a personal preference, probably not much more important than other lifestyle choices. We don’t think of God in universal terms and not really as a thing to order society by. We would never ever suggest a state religion except in a nominalistic way— yes we’re Anglican, but it’s not like we take it seriously enough to seriously teach it or publicly acknowledge it or encourage its practice.

Comparing that to MENA, they’d be convinced that most of the West are atheists. They don’t allow the public display of religion outside of the state sect of Islam. They not only live by those rules themselves, and publicly so, but enforce those rules on everyone whether Muslims or not. The Quran bans homosexual behavior and they will teach gays to fly off skyscrapers. The mindset is that Allah is watching and allah is going to not only keep score but intervene in history and in personal life to enforce his will.

Now on the liberal conservative version, I think it’s the same thing. Liberals are farther along the path to practical atheism. Most have at best found churches that are liberal first and Christian second, if they bother to go. They’re much more down the path of chewing almost everything through the Post-Modern Neo-Marxist lens of oppression and global culture norms of not judging anything except traditional Western values. As such they simply cannot fathom that someone might take such things seriously.

MENA was a seriously different place from the west even when the west took religion seriously; endemic cousin marriage and segmentary lineage will do that

Tucker Carlson has characterized this election as the people who talk down to others vs. those who are sick of being talked down to

And some guy called Shelly Wynter commented to outrage a week ago:

“Let me boil this election down in the African American community to a very simple — I’ll reference the great Malcolm X,” he said. “This race is between house African Americans and field African Americans, and field African Americans are voting for [Donald] Trump.”

Black people certainly do have their own um... interesting versions of everything.

What Donald Trump has over Mitt Romney, J.D. Vance, and Ron DeSantis is that black people seem to genuinely like him. He's got swag. He's the second blackest President in history, trailing Bill Clinton but ahead of Obama.

But there are downsides. My elderly WASP relatives hate him. So disrespectful, so uncouth! Can't win New Hampshire with an attitude like that.

And here I thought being in the party of racism supporters would more easily bring himself to quote that directly.

Of course, his massa(s) will beat his ass if he says it, which implies he himself serves in the house.

There's definitely a stolen valor angle. "Kamala had actually worked there while Trump never had a day of retail work in his life". Do you think upper PMC democrats are the ones posting on Reddit about the entire thing being a sham?

McDonalds is the most well-known public-facing minimum wage job, but I don't doubt there'd be stolen valor vitriol over CostCo too.

To me it looks like there's a huge disconnect between themotte's view of a typical democrat voter and reality. Just off the top of my head I'd assume there are more low socioeconomic class "that's why I shit on company time" democrat voters in the country than upper class "mcdonalds is too good for presidents" snobs.

To me it looks like there's a huge disconnect between themotte's view of a typical democrat voter and reality. Just off the top of my head I'd assume there are more low socioeconomic class "that's why I shit on company time" democrat voters in the country than upper class "mcdonalds is too good for presidents" snobs.

They have both. Democrats dominate the people without income, people with extremely low income, and people with high income derived from sinecures.

They lose most of the rest.

McDonalds is the most well-known public-facing minimum wage job, but I don't doubt there'd be stolen valor vitriol over CostCo too.

Costco notoriously pays above market and doesn't hire temporary workers, so it would have to be Walmart.

To me it looks like there's a huge disconnect between themotte's view of a typical democrat voter and reality. Just off the top of my head I'd assume there are more low socioeconomic class "that's why I shit on company time" democrat voters in the country than upper class "mcdonalds is too good for presidents" snobs.

Dramatically. The Democrats still win the lowest two income quintiles, it's just by a lot less than it used to be.

I haven't seen 'stolen valour' as an angle except from republicans trying to psychoanalyze their opponents. While this might be somewhat more likely to be accurate than the reverse, that's still a low enough bar to clear that it doesn't tell us much. I think most of the chatter is probably just TDS.

I think Reddit is populated mostly by college age children of PMC parents or by failsons who were raised in a PMC family. So while the actual PMC democrats probably aren’t, the people posting on Reddit have been raised in PMC families and have those values. They’re more obnoxious about it mostly because they don’t have the wisdom to hide their PMC power level, or perhaps don’t have to care yet.

There's an angle, definitely. But my visceral response is that people would be much less angry at Trump doing a CostCo photo op than a McDonald's photo op. And, by the same token, there's a reason his campaign decided to do a McDonald's photo op over a CostCo photo op. The role McDonald's plays in the American imagination is key. Or, rather, in the two decidedly different American imaginations: one where it's symbolic of all the worst of American culture, and one where it gives fast convenient yummy oily treats.

There's definitely a stolen valor angle.

I'd be open to the possibility, but no one who's freaking out about it seems to be credibly approaching it from the "stolen valor" angle.

Do you think upper PMC democrats are the ones posting on Reddit about the entire thing being a sham?

I'm sorry what? Do you think /r/antiwork, or the entirety of Reddit for that matter, is in any way representative of a typical McDonald's worker?

To me it looks like there's a huge disconnect between themotte's view of a typical democrat voter and reality.

This isn't about The Motte. It's one of those things that has visceral resonance, and the more you push back against it, the more it will look like Trump had a point to begin with.

but no one who's freaking out about it seems to be credibly approaching it from the "stolen valor" angle.

No one? Not one single person on planet Earth? Well sure then.

What's your definition of "someone"?

Do you think /r/antiwork is in any way representative of a typical McDonald's worker?

Well no, I think a typical worker in service industry or any other low-paid job posts on TikTok, not Reddit. Of those service workers whose viewpoint I do see on Reddit, or for example on various discords, they're closer to /r/antiwork in their ideology than to "it's 'onest work".

This isn't about The Motte. It's one of those things that has visceral resonance, and the more you push back against it, the more it will look like Trump had a point to begin with.

Unfortunately, our visceral resonances seem to be at odds.

No one? Not one single person on planet Earth? Well sure then.

Most people on planet Earth have never heard about it. Most people who will see this will think "heh, that's kinda funny". Somewhere, out there, there might be some lonely indivuduals upset at the valor stolen from service workers, but they'll be drowned out by legions that are upset that Trump did something mildly appealing to the common folk.

Of those service workers whose viewpoint I do see on Reddit, or for example on various discords, they're closer to /r/antiwork in their ideology than to "it's 'onest work".

"Of those service workers whose viewpoint I do see on Reddit" had to pass through so many filters that it will bear no resemblance to any remotely normal person. Reddit is a propaganda platform.

Unfortunately, our visceral resonances seem to be at odds.

I know this will sound weird, but I don't know if I believe you. Kavanaugh being a rapist vs. not was a disagreement of visceral resonances, Rittenhouse being a murderer vs. an innocent kid was a disagreement of visceral resonances... but this? The only visceral feeling I get here from the progressive side is "Trump bad. This good for Trump, therefore this bad".

but they'll be drowned out by legions that are upset that Trump did something mildly appealing to the common folk.

Where are those legions who express the belief that it is unbefitting of Trump to appeal to the common folk (as opposed to saying it's wrong to falsely appeal)? I've linked mine.

"Of those service workers whose viewpoint I do see on Reddit" had to pass through so many filters that it will bear no resemblance to any remotely normal person. Reddit is a propaganda platform.

What's your platform that is not a propaganda platform?

The only visceral feeling I get here

Here on the Motte? If not, then where?

I agree with other users that it's a clever publicity stunt, in that it will work with his base and the opposing base, naturally, is irrelevant to him. It's also bad, in my personal opinion, because it's transparently dishonest to associate yourself with menial work that you do not do and have never (in my knowledge) done. If Kamala is acting like her time at McDonalds was a nightmare, she's at least being honest even if she'll alienate the voters (likely red-voting anyway) who think menial work is always ennobling.

Where are those legions who express the belief that it is unbefitting of Trump to appeal to the common folk (as opposed to saying it's wrong to falsely appeal)? I've linked mine.

It's the same link. You don't really expect people to outright say "damn that Trump, why is he so appealing?" even that's what they feel, do you?

What's your platform that is not a propaganda platform

We're running short on those these days. I guess you can still post anything you want on Substack.

It's also bad, in my personal opinion, because it's transparently dishonest to associate yourself with menial work that you do not do and have never done

I'd chalk it up to getting upset at Gillette's slogan again, except:

If Kamala is acting like her time at McDonalds was a nightmare, she's at least being honest

This is completely backwards. There is no evidence she has spent a single day working in McDonalds. It's Trump who's honest here because his "lie" is just advertising, and everybody knows how it works. Kamala is the dishonest one, because people (including you) actually believe she made a factual statement about herself.

This is also how we know people upset at this aren't upset at dishonesty or stolen valor. No one who is criticizing Trump for this will turn around to criticize Harris, when it's pointed out she didn't work for McDonald's.

More comments

I don’t think republicans think menial labor is per se ennobling. Instead, it is admirable to work instead of take hand me outs. That is, I don’t want people to stay working at menial jobs but if they start there and work hard in an effort to move up — kudos!

because it's transparently dishonest to associate yourself with menial work that you do not do and have never (in my knowledge) done

Yes, but associating yourself with them is the thing you have to do if you want to manage a company filled with the people doing those things regardless of whether you see yourself as above them or not (which you'll recognize as the stereotypical Karen mindset).

That is [one of] your job[s] in that position; Kamala is refusing to do that job.

(And that's completely ignoring the "leader is himself a servant" thing being... kind of foundational to the "Protestant" part of "Protestant work ethic".)

these humanizing events really undermine the narrative

Do they?

Even dictators can do a good photo op.

Even dictators can do a good photo op.

No, they can't. Their attempts to be cool are all cringe and gay.

Trump hit a real nerve here. People liked what they saw. The common touch is not easy to fake. Witness the multiple attempts by Harris proxies to do the same and fail.

Attack Trump for his policies all you want, but he can speak to the people in a way that few politicians can. He's not a phony.

They don't want to let it get to the "funny pic of Gaddafi or Putin shirtless on a horse" stage. They want it to stay at the "ominous devil figure" stage. The former implies some fatalism.

They've never made their peace with the fact that their country can elect someone like Trump and they don't want anyone else to either. Ironically, it's the "where my country gone?" meme they mocked for so long.

While Trump is making a correct move by being among his voters and not hiding in an ivory tower McDonalds isn't exactly a great brand to be associated with. Why associate yourself with unhealthy, bland consumerist food? Mcdonalds should represent the opposite of what the right stands for. It is the antithesis of tradition, beauty, culture, small business and family.

Because that's America's burger. Unhealthy, bland, consumerist food that takes advantage of a weird strategy to make money on real estate and not the actual burger is America.

That's America's president. America, as it exists today, is the antithesis of tradition, beauty, culture, small business and family. It has spent the last fifty years gleefully tearing down tradition and family, and when it's not actively hostile to small business it's trying to buy them out or crush them. It defines culture as being what the majority don't like and beauty as what the majority enjoy because they are stupid.

McDonalds is one of America's most successful cultural exports next to the Internet and pre-2020s Hollywood. Your opinion on McDonalds aside, it is an American institution, built by Americans, and is wildly successful.

Why associate yourself with unhealthy, bland consumerist food?

The quarter pounder is one of the top 3 fast food burgers out there (especially in its double permutation) and is ubiquitously available. Wendy's has fallen off completely, Burger King has blown for more than a decade, and you need to cede a significant fraction of a minimum wage paycheck for Five Guys or Shake Shack, if you live near one.

The app performs reasonably well and you can actually get the food you order 90% of the time, unlike a bone-in-chicken place. It's really not that bad.

Maybe the right should be against it but I can't imagine going back a decade and telling people Trump's brand is incompatible with bland consumerism.

When I drive cross-country, McDonalds has the most reliably clean restrooms, and they don't insist on you buying stuff first. (The one exception to that I found was in a Denver suburb, where they had a sign on the bathroom saying "For customers only". I asked a worker to let me and the kids in, and she did without any questions, and without requiring a purchase. I guess that's to discourage the local homeless.)

The food is also fine. I don't subsist on it, but an occasional chicken sandwich isn't going to kill me any faster than anything else I can get quickly on the road.

(The one exception to that I found was in a Denver suburb, where they had a sign on the bathroom saying "For customers only".

This is pretty common IME in areas where crime and homeless are legitimate concerns.

The food is also fine. I don't subsist on it, but an occasional chicken sandwich isn't going to kill me any faster than anything else I can get quickly on the road.

Yeah, people exaggerate how unhealthy typical McDonald's food is. Their cokes are the exact same ones you can get anywhere else, their fries and burgers and nuggets contain more additives than elsewhere but have roughly similar macros, it's the 'treats'- frappes and mcflurries and deserts- that kill people there, and that's mostly just from McDonald's cornering the market. And even then, a bunch of this is really more like a starbucks drink, just to lower class clientele.

None of this is health food, but McDonald's is lower class and really common, so it makes an easy scapegoat.

Yeah, people exaggerate how unhealthy typical McDonald's food is. Their cokes are the exact same ones you can get anywhere else, their fries and burgers and nuggets contain more additives than elsewhere but have roughly similar macros, it's the 'treats'- frappes and mcflurries and deserts- that kill people there, and that's mostly just from McDonald's cornering the market. And even then, a bunch of this is really more like a starbucks drink, just to lower class clientele.

It's not unhealthy in relative terms, but it's still unhealthy. Fries, sauces, treats and non-diet coke are terrible. Nuggets are okay. Burgers are okay. But no one orders just a burger. If you have small fries with buffalo sauce, a small coke and a cone with your burger, the macros are not that bad. For a dinner. But if it's medium fries with ranch, a medium coke and a regular M&M's soft serve, it's many more calories than anyone who's not a miner or a lumberjack needs.

But if it's medium fries with ranch, a medium coke and a regular M&M's soft serve

Wait, I could have been getting fries with ranch or buffalo sauce all this time? Dang, maybe I do wish people would upsell me sometimes and not just offer me the pies (which I think have the highest calorie to dollar ratio of any fast food menu item ever).

But no one orders just a burger.

I was under the impression that everyone orders the standard meal. And if you do that, you're still coming in around 1K calories; you could go twice a day if you actually wanted to and be treading water, calorically speaking. Maybe if you get the mocha/lattes you'd be pushing 1400 but their coffee (that is not actually offered in the US locations, so maybe it doesn't apply as much) is good enough there's no reason to bother.

If I had to guess I'd say McDonalds optimizes its meals around 1000 calories specifically because these days it says so right beside the thing on the menu, where other places are usually pushing 1300-1400 for their default meal, which means your other meal now has to be smaller to compensate especially if you only eat twice a day and work a sedentary job.

Maybe if you get the mocha/lattes you'd be pushing 1400 but their coffee (that is not actually offered in the US locations, so maybe it doesn't apply as much) is good enough there's no reason to bother.

What? US McDonald's definitely serves filter coffee. It's very popular and there was even a notable lawsuit over it.

US McDonald's definitely serves filter coffee.

Yes, but it's fucking awful. It's coffee-inspired water by comparison.

It's not gourmet coffee, but it's approximately diner-quality, and is fast and cheap. It's definitely superior to the coffee at many other fast food places, not to mention gas stations and truck stops.

EDIT: Is this a Euro thing about not liking drip coffee?

More comments

Trump is associating himself with working at McDonald’s, not with it as a cornerstone of the American diet. One in eight Americans have worked at McDonald’s- statistically, Trump is showing that he’s not too good for an incredibly common American experience.

Now obviously it’s a campaign stunt. But it’s a clever campaign stunt that plays into his Everyman image.

But it’s a clever campaign stunt that plays into his Everyman image.

Has Trump ever had an "Everyman" image? As far as I can recall, Trump has always represented a billionaire business tycoon. Maybe he acts the same way an average person would act if they won the lottery (gold plated toilets, supermodel wives, etc.) but I don't think he was ever a true "Everyman" in the same way Homer Simpson is.

He's definitely done the 'Boss swaps jobs with a worker' schtick before with good results.

The video of this was freely available until recently, but I've been trying to search for it in Youtube and it seemed to have been memory holed until I found it through external search engines.

Edit: Clip was from Oprah's show in 2011.

Trump has always had a bit of a plebian sense of wealth. The expression a decade ago was that Trump lived like how poor people thought the rich lived, as opposed to how the rich actually lived. In that sense, he's the 'what the Everyman would see himself doing if he had Trump's wealth.'

Michèle Lamont, in The Dignity of Working Men, also found resentment of professionals — but not of the rich. “[I] can’t knock anyone for succeeding,” a laborer told her. “There’s a lot of people out there who are wealthy and I’m sure they worked darned hard for every cent they have,” chimed in a receiving clerk. Why the difference? For one thing, most blue-collar workers have little direct contact with the rich outside of Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous. But professionals order them around every day. The dream is not to become upper-middle-class, with its different food, family, and friendship patterns; the dream is to live in your own class milieu, where you feel comfortable — just with more money. “The main thing is to be independent and give your own orders and not have to take them from anybody else,” a machine operator told Lamont. Owning one’s own business — that’s the goal. That’s another part of Trump’s appeal.

Hillary Clinton, by contrast, epitomizes the dorky arrogance and smugness of the professional elite. The dorkiness: the pantsuits. The arrogance: the email server. The smugness: the basket of deplorables. Worse, her mere presence rubs it in that even women from her class can treat working-class men with disrespect. Look at how she condescends to Trump as unfit to hold the office of the presidency and dismisses his supporters as racist, sexist, homophobic, or xenophobic.

The following is a transcript of a conversation I had with a friend which I think is relevant. I have recreated it as closely as possible.

clo: Work is shit. Humans can become accustomed to completely terrible conditions. Thrive in them, even. So why do people hate work? Why are there so many grifters, liars, cheats, when honest work seems, genuinely, easier? Because work is shit. People would rather debase themselves on Onlyfans or spend 18 hours editing some shitty yt video than work.

hv: arguably, it is working for a living. there's a streamer a mate watches, mainly does Resident Evil successful. chatter asks what it's like and how to get started themselves. his answer: "it's a job". he wakes up, has breakfast, maybe exercises, then plays Resident Evil for 12 hours, takes holidays, gets breaks, he's not in a cubicle, but yeah. that's work. I'd put money on guessing that most grifts are pretty fuckin' hard work too. people like to gloss over exactly how much effort and work things take because, yeah, it's ugly.

clo: Yeah but have you thought about why they did that. Over working. That's the question

hv: they are working, though

clo: not my question

hv: or are you drawing a line between working for themselves or someone else?

clo: Why did the guy choose to play RE for money, over say, getting a job? I refuse to believe there aren't jobs that pay more, especially now? Why would someone work for Rooster Teeth over like, I don't know, taking a minimum hours job in db admin.

hv: well in all these comparisons it sems to boil down to "working for yourself" or "working for someone else, who pays you"

clo: I've worked all through coof. I've had (counting) six jobs, and the whole thing reminds me, depressingly, of the replacement debate. People aren't honest because the honest answer is bad. They can say it's money or qualifications, and those are definitely factors. But I think it comes down to this: people hate work because modern workplaces are fucking dogshit for self respect. It's not the pay, it's not even the working conditions, it's the fact that you have to swallow your balls and watch as shit rolls over you from on top. that's literally it

hv: we agree on this, shit rolls downhill. why would anyone want to start climbing?

clo: I think this is all. And I wish it could be solved. Certain people do climb in this system and that's also why, you built a system that self selects for cowards and psychopaths. People say it's money, I don't think so. I've witnessed people turn down money to stay low. I've personally worked at two companies that were known for underpaying employees but treated their employees like human beings. They never had trouble retaining. In fact, people left and then came back. This is why someone would rather try and make pennies streaming Fortnite, than even take a mcjob for a couple months, because you'd have to swallow your pride for a half fucking second and just bend over and take it. You will be reminded of it every second of every day. And if you forget, the job won't let you forget. It's like being a prison bitch. Everyone knows. You know.

hv: yeeeeeah I think this is what got galvanized working at the last two places

clo: So that's why people are checking out. The depressing fucking thing is, working from home changed that. It gave people back a modicum of self respect

hv: AND THEY IMMEDIATELY TRIED TO TAKE IT AWAY LMFAO, YES

clo: it resulted in a flood of people quitting. In some case they don't come back even for 50% more salary, I've seen the numbers. So yeah, kids want to grow up to be a streamer. Being a streamer is pretty much objectively shit unless you are the 0.01%

hv: "content creator"

clo: You have zero job security and are dependent on algorithms and how much Twitch feels like losing. But people would rather do that than be a prison bitch, because you would know you were a prison bitch. People don't respond well to being told what to do. And to have your material existence and quality of life being used as blackmail against you to make you do as you're told - which, let's face it, is exactly what work feels like even though it's not what it actually is in a lot of cases, well... In the rumored words of Churchill, badly paraphrased, you already know you're a whore. The rest of it is haggling about the price. Wallstreetbets openly advertises how horrible it is to your financial well being, but people continue to yeet their life savings into it at warp speed. Why is that? It's because if they win, they're nobody's bitch

hv: Fuck You Money

clo: Now are you capable of finding your own path to money? Or are you a bitch?

hv: this plays into why people are finding it harder to get into relationships, doesn't it

clo: A relationship is work. We know it's not work for some people. We know because we see it and they tell us how great it is (or are lying). So why are we working for it? Fuck this!

The arrogance: the email server.

For a second I forgot about the specific Hillary context and reacted to this with, "What's wrong with Exchange admins!?"

There is a lot to this. Upvoted and AAQC'd, but I wanted to put one of the resident motteizean blue collar workers on record as saying- I see this attitude every day. You want to know why working class voters of all races, especially white ones, are turning against the DNC? Because their politicians come off as our hired bosses- managers, not owner-men, and especially as the HR people and managers of whatever the fuck who get left to deliver bad news when the actual bosses don't want to-, and the GOP pols come off as people who worked to build their own businesses.

Of course this is a false impression, and of course I have my own disagreements with democrat policies. But politics is vibes based.

Why is it a false impression though?

People who build their own business are more likely to be Republican than the PMC. It's not the whole story, obviously, but nothing is.

Nothing will turn a person Republican faster than owning their own business and seeing the heaping pile of shit that the government throws at you every chance they get.

It's a false impression because there are very few politicians of either description. Democrats running for office have mostly been in government service since they finished college and republicans running for office may have had careers beforehand, but usually as like, investment bankers and the like- few started businesses.

More comments

Note that Trump is already heavily associated with having McDonald's as a cornerstone of the American diet.

Mcdonalds should represent the opposite of what the right stands for. It is the antithesis of tradition, beauty, culture, small business and family.

On the contrary, McDonald’s represents the true culture of the American proletariat. You may never have worked at McDonald’s, but you know someone who worked at McDonald’s. The elitist liberal media says that McDonald’s is unhealthy slop, but deep down, you know the truth. every blue-collar worker in America has done great things fueled by a quick stop at McDonald’s.

The elitist liberal media says that McDonald’s is unhealthy slop, but deep down, you know the truth.

Yup. Very few people are deluding themselves that a McDonalds burger is healthy, but it's honest. Yeah, ground beef isn't the healthiest meat, white bread buns aren't the most nutritious either, but from remembering what I used to think when I was a liberal 15 years ago, it's as if McDonalds had an Underpants Gnome-like scheme that increased their profits from sneaking in toxic sludge inside their food and customer base.

Now, Portillo's Chocolate Cake Shake, that is one thing that on my last trip to the US that I couldn't allow myself to eat just from looking at the caloric intake it represented. That actually seemed like it was designed to bring ruination to a body.

While i do appreciate that mcdonalds uses real beef patties in their staple burgers, they also peddle a lot of weird stuff that kindof pretends to be something else. If you look at their website that describes a hamburger you may notice that the line where they say they dont use fillers/preservatives etc has an asterisk next to it. The asterisk is because this claim only applies to their nationally available permanent hamburger menu items. Chicken nuggets for instance do not adhere to a strict chicken and breading philosophy.

I agree that the hippyish mindset of mcdonalds being made of dead pig anuses is a fantasy, but i dont think the mc rib is what i would consider "honest" food. Their french fries contain Hydrolyzed Wheat, so a usually gluten free food is not gluten free at mcdonalds.

I guess my point is that while i dont hate mcdonalds i would be wary of lionizing them with the word "honest"

Interesting and... kind of true? I think it was Kerouac who presented roadside hamburger stands as the embodiment of the Great American Spirit (maybe On the Road, but could have been a more obscure book) and Steinbeck definitely raved about mobile homes in Travels with Charley. (in which he drives around in a camper-truck and does DIY veterinary interventions on his poodle in 60s USA)

Why associate yourself with unhealthy, bland consumerist food? Mcdonalds should represent the opposite of what the right stands for. It is the antithesis of tradition, beauty, culture, small business and family.

I really can't get myself into the headspace of someone who doesn't understand what this stunt is about.

McDonnald's is low-status precisely for the reasons you point out, but people eat there because it's affordable, and they work there because they'll hire anyone right off the street. He's showing he's on the side of people dismissed as "low-status".

It's not affordable anymore though, so he's a bit late.

Senators Warren, Wyden, and Casey are on it and made a press release today:

https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-casey-wyden-slam-mcdonalds-for-squeezing-customers-with-excessive-price-increases

Late news. They pivoted back.

$6 now gets you a McDouble, small fries, 4 piece nuggets, and a small coke. Counting app rewards all-in cost is closer to $5. It's real cheap.

But they do screw people who order a la carte items now.

It is, you just have to use the app.

If you ever find a mcdonalds app on my phone I'm already dead and robbed. :)

How are they not bankrupt? It was their only redeeming quality.

It can still be, it's just that they've tiered their offering to extract more money at the top of the market. They probably realized there's a lot of people eating at McDonald's who don't really go because it's cheap, and would be willing to pay over 10$ for a trio, so they added items for that market, but you can still eat what I'd call a full meal for around 5 US dollars.

Couple of things-

  1. McDonald’s is not exactly cheap, but it is slightly cheaper than the competition. Some people actually want and like greasy fast food and McDonalds is on the affordable end.

  2. Poor people really like McDonald’s treats for whatever reason. Think frappes and the like. I think it has to do with the amount of sugar in it.

  3. McDonald’s offers a lot of deals and coupons and the like. I have no interest in minmaxing for cheap Mickey d’s, but someone who wants to can easily do so rather effectively.

  4. McDonald’s stores are owned by franchisees, and corporate makes their money by extracting rent from franchisees with only a limited effect from sales.

I don’t know if it’s because I’m getting older or if basic reasoning is actually at an all time low, but the “debunking” that the store preselected customers and that it was just for a photo op is absurd. (Top post on Reddit for the week is approximately that). Like yeah, of course they didn’t allow a presidential candidate with 3x attempts on his life to serve anyone driving by. Do they have any idea how risky it would be to do that, even if you scanned all the cars beforehand? Of course it was just for photos — do they think he was genuinely employed there? None of these debunk or detect an iota of the spectacle, but that they are shilled so hard signals that there really are low IQ Americans who are persuaded by this. The Reddit political propaganda in recent weeks has also been lots of “look at this photo taken at an inopportune moment that makes him look bad”, like the Elon Musk jumping photo. Yeah, if 20 photographers take 500 photos each, some are destined to make the subject look bad.

widely seen as trashy and disrespectful

I disagree. It was widely seen as awesome, including by those in attendance. It was narrowly seen as trashy by snotty rich progressives who don’t want to admit they enjoy the occasional fast food.

that it was fake

Duh, he's a politician on the campaign trail. There's something "It's Okay To Be White" about this, where most of the propaganda value of the stunt is in the reaction. A lot has been said about Trump's decline, and I agree, he's not the same man he was in 2016, but either he, or someone running his campaign, still seems to have the touch.

There's something "It's Okay To Be White" about this, where most of the propaganda value of the stunt is in the reaction.

I think it speaks to the "red tribe/blue tribe dichotomy" described by the OP and the notion of "Protestant work ethic" brought up by others downthread.

There is a real sense that the blue side seems to view hard work (and service/menial service work in particular) as beneath them. Work is something to be suffered through when neccesary and avioded if possible. Whatever you're work is, it's not something your supposed to be smiling about or celebrating. One might almost be forgiven for thinking that "Flipping Burgers" was some sort of PMC euphemism for a fate worse than death given the spit that often accompanies those words. (as an aside The Menu was a pretty good movie).

As with "It's Okay To Be White" what i think is happening here is that the media and the Democrats are being baited into expressing "true feelings" that they would otherwise conceal. ie "that it's not ok to be white" or in this case that "working and serving is for suckers" which naturally doesn't play well amongst people who actually work.

He seems kind of on fire lately TBH -- he may not be quite as sharp as 2016, but he's gotten back into the 'generate free advertising by trolling the MSM' groove finally.

I fully expect to be well entertained for the next couple of weeks.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats