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 -
People said this in 2016 too. Not saying you are wrong, but it's ascribes too much power to him or the wrong motives. Trump was constantly tweeting about the stock market and the strength of the US economy during his first term ,so it's evident the economy is important to him and he's not going to fuck it up if he can prevent it. Also, I am skeptical at how can he simultaneously fail to accomplish anything but also fuck things up or irreparably ruin America' standing. Even during Covid, America led the world in developing a vaccine, and then Trump stimulus programs engendered a rapid economic recovery as other countries stalled out with endless lockdowns and relapses.
Given how well the stock market has done in recent months in light of the >50% prospect of a Trump victory, I think market participants are optimistic, as am I. He will pass stimulus, tax cuts...typical stuff. Inflation and debt will keep going but but it won't lead to crisis, just more of the same stuff we've become accustomed to over the past 12 years. The tariffs will not do much either, similar to his first term.
The election process sucks in that America will be more divided regardless of the outcome . Instead of elections being discreate events, they are merged into continuous events where the campaigning begins at the end of the present cycle. If it's close then there may be a repeat of 2020, but it will not lead to crisis, but it will be another slog. Elections have become too high stakes, and it would be nice to see a return to the 80s, 90s, or 2000s when there was not so much at stake or such a big deal.
The only way to actually do that though is to disempower the state to do those things. It’s important because it’s everywhere doing everything and therefore you either take it over and use it to devour your enemies or you get devoured yourself. Taking for example LGBTQ issues. In 1990, the big issue was basically state recognition of gay marriages. This actually (on paper) affected maybe 3% of the us population and the wedding industry. Fast forward 30 years and now the issues of LGBTQ touch everything from education and child protection to medical care to sports and restrooms. The government controls very much more just on this set of issues alone. Go on to environmental issues and it’s now things like the car you drive, the kinds of appliances you own, the cost of electricity and fuel, getting roads built and so on. Given just how intrusive the government is over the government of Bill Clinton in 1992, it’s not much of a wonder that a much more powerful state is a much bigger prize that the elites of all stripes are eager to control. If the survival of an industry depends on the outcome of an election, or your right to know if your child has a gender identity issue hinges on the results of an election, elections become extremely important.
Drain the government of power over people and industries and nobody would care. If I could simply choose my school board and know they would not insert their political beliefs into the classrooms, I wouldn’t be super worried. People in 1900 barely knew who was running the central government because it didn’t actually touch them personally.
More options
Context Copy link
Well, if he wins, I'd honestly love to say in four years "I was wrong, Trump was great." I am not putting any money on that bet, though.
Probably for the best, give how likely you would be to lose that bet. It's not like Trump has to do 'great' to not 'epically fuck up,' which was the bar you set.
From your post, you'd be wrong if Trump just did as well as last time. Heck, you'd still be wrong if he did worse than he did last time.
Okay, well, if he's elected and he doesn't epically fuck up and we're no worse off than before, I'll be wrong.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link