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 -
The reason why the Puerto Rico as trash island gaffe may be cutting through in a way which the average "Republican says something vaguely racist" or "Democrat insults the rustbelt" story doesn't is that it isn't just an attack on the outgroup. The much bigger issue is that it may be, and can be spun as, a mask-off moment about who the outgroup is.
The big positive message of the MSG rally, and in my view the Trump campaign more generally, is "Real America is uniting behind Trump to crush the external enemy (illegal immigrants and an unspecified subset of undesirable legal immigrants) and the internal enemy ("far-left lunatics", which has a deliberately ambiguous meaning but appears to include the Democratic politicians letting the external enemy in). To make this work, Trump has to define "Real America" broadly enough to have enough votes. And, at the margin, the key groups that the Trump campaign have successfully included in their idea of "Real America" in a way previous identarian-right movements failed to do are black men with otherwise-conservative views and well-assimilated Hispanics. And the big threat to that outreach is the not-unreasonable fear among well-assimilated Hispanics that Trump's coalition don't see them as Real Americans, even as Trump himself insists that they are. If Musk or Vance or some other sufficiently prominent Trump supporter said "Actually, Puerto Ricans aren't real Americans" and didn't get slapped down then Trump would be toast.
Apart from Hinchcliffe, every other speaker who does a funny bit is clowning on MAGA's outgroup (mostly named Democratic politicians, but also California, flag burners, art fags etc). And that is what you expect at a unity rally. There is a time and a place for equal-opportunity clown-on-everyone comedy, but right after prayers and the national anthem isn't it - and in any case from reading the transcript of Hinchcliffe's bit, the nearest thing to an ingroup roast is where he suggests his own mother might have joined in the pet-eating in Ohio. There are, for the obvious good reasons, no jokes about inbred West Virginians, SSDI cheats, or fat divorced middle-aged men, and I do not think the audience would have laughed at them if there had been. It certainly looks like Hinchcliffe was put on the agenda to clown on the outgroup - probably a poor choice (and definitely a poor choice in hindsight) because his MO as a comedian is to go after everyone.
So when Hinchcliffe calls Puerto Rico a trash island and the audience laughs (from listening to the video, my guess is that a lot of them don't, but Hinchcliffe treats the half-laugh as a slow audience to warm up rather than a joke that went down badly, which does the Democrats' work for them spinning it), the message sent is "MAGA considers Puerto Ricans to be the kind of people it is okay to clown on straight after the national anthem at a unity rally." And that message is not consistent with the appeal to assimilated Hispanics that Trump has, to date, been making successfully. "Trump hates Puerto Ricans" is spin, but it is true that Hinchcliffe and the rally attendees who laughed at him think Puerto Ricans are their outgroup, that the Trump campaign chose Hinchcliffe to speak straight after the national anthem, and that Trump is sending flacks to deflect blame for what Hinchcliffe said rather than using his bully pulpit to say how much he loves Puerto Ricans.
Is any of this going to affect the election? Probably not, because nothing seems to be affecting the election - from outside it feels like everyone made their mind up within 2 weeks of Biden pulling out, and we are just waiting to see which side in a 50-50 nation has the better GOTV operation. But "Republicans think Puerto Rico is trash" is news in a way which "Biden thinks Republicans are trash" is not, so if anything is going to affect the election at this late stage, Hinchcliffe's gaffe is a candidate.
An alternate reading would be that well-assimilated Hispanics would see an attack on Puerto Rico as a jab at non-assimilated Hispanics. A few reasons:
There is nothing stopping Puerto Ricans from moving to the mainland, as a great many have. The ones who have elected to stay on the island, in this reading, would be the ones who intentionally chose not to assimilate into America.
My understanding is that Puerto Rico is still very culturally different from America, despite being an American territory, and that rates of English fluency on the island are quite low. I also gather that the larger Latin American world sees Puerto Rico as a shithole, and Puertorriqueños as lazy, stupid, and heavily admixed with African ancestry. Thus, assimilated Hispanic Americans would see a jab at Puerto Rico the way upper-middle-class coastal Americans would see an attack on inbred hillbillies.
As someone else pointed out, Puerto Ricans in America are a reliably leftist voting bloc. As recently as the 70’s, Puerto Rican independence activists were shooting Congressmen and committing waves of bombings all over America. In NYC they are a core Democratic voting/power bloc. Even wealthy and well-educated Puerto Ricans like Luis Miranda (father of Hamilton playwright Lin-Manuel Miranda) are often hardcore racial chauvinists and have deep ties to Puerto Rican separatists, including terrorists. I don’t think they should be considered examples of “well-assimilated Americans”, at least not in a political sense.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that Puerto Rico is a part of America.
What has always amused me is that we've spent quite a bit of effort nationally tamping down discrimination in the basis of national origin, but I've never seen it applied domestically. Saying "Georgians need not apply" and rejecting job applications from those born in Tbilisi is actually against federal law. I don't know of any case law if you do that for Atlanta.
Is there some for Puerto Ricans? They are American from a national origin perspective. You could make an argument that it's a language and cultural thing, but nobody is up in arms about California banning contracts with Texas (because inadequate social justice) for a disparate impact on Spanish-speaking Tejanos.
We've become so fixed on rooting out certain discrimination, but turn a blind eye to it domestically.
In practice, anti-Puerto Rican discrimination would get struck down on ethnic grounds.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It is an unincorporated territory. Residents of Puerto Rico are American citizens, but they cannot vote in federal elections and generally do not pay federal income taxes. The island is largely self-governing, and its residents are highly culturally-distinct from the American mainland. It’s as much “a part of America” as, say, Guam, which is to say, only in a complicated political sense. Like I said, Puerto Rican separatist terrorism was a significant political issue in the 1960s and 1970s, and although that violence has subsided, my understanding is that Puerto Ricans are deeply divided in regards to what degree of political/cultural integration they want with the mainland United States.
Guam catching strays. Guam is way more American than Puerto Rico, hell, at least on Guam English is actually the primary language. I think Guam is at least as American as any Hawaiian island (except in a complicated pollical sense).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
On the other hand, much of the Biden-turned-Harris campaign's message has been focused on how Trump is morally dangerous and demonizes people. If your message is that even people who disagree with you should vote for you because of your Moral Superiority™️, debasing yourself and even dipping a toe in the waters of open hatred makes it really easy to show the moral claims are a farce.
If you're an on-the-fence voter here -- maybe even disliking both candidates -- but leaning toward holding your nose to vote for Harris on account of "decorum", her boss calling your friends (the neighbor with a Trump sign on the lawn) "garbage" probably gives quite a bit of pause. At least it does to me.
I think "Prominent Democrats hate Trump supporters, think they are [insert slur here], and are happy to say so if they don't realise there is an open mic" is priced in by now - in much the same way that "Trump is uncouth" is priced in. Biden isn't saying anything in private that he wasn't willing to say in public in his 2022 midterms speech where he said "MAGA Republicans" were a threat to democracy (complete with scary red lighting in the background).
The point I am trying to make is that "MAGA see Puerto Ricans as outgroup" is not priced in - if Hinchcliffe had said Haiti was a trash island it would have been a dog bites man story.
I'd think it's roughly the opposite of that (at least in reality, but maybe you're making a good case for why pundits would try to make this stick). Puerto Rico works as the punchline because it's a funny surprise, exactly because they're not a serious outgroup currently, but are a decent sub-population in NYC. They can take being roasted in 2024, especially when the bit is more about the 'island of trash' setup, and the punchline just needs to be [real place].
It would have actually sounded a lot meaner and out of place if he said "yeah, I think it's called Haiti". That's where other comedians would start saying 'woah did this just turn into a klan rally?'
The ingroup would have been if the punchline was “Long Island” (or indeed Staten Island). Puerto Ricans aren’t GOP voters like Cubans are, they’re a core Dem base in NYC which is why people have said this was potentially strategically unwise (not that NY matters, but still). If he’d said Haiti NYT journalists would call the rally ‘racist’ on Twitter or say the remarks were “racially charged” in the press, but not much else would happen, because almost no Haitians are going to vote for Trump.
Given who the MAGA right see as their outgroup, "Manhattan" would have been even better. NYC also has notorious problems with garbage and rats - which are much more well-known than Puerto Rico's because, well, NYC. In the second half of 2024 they are introducing bins as a new, innovative garbage management innovation. The campaign to do this had used #Trashcity as a hashtag on the basis that everyone knew it referred to NYC.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
You haven’t presented any evidence it is in fact cutting through. The democrats and their allied media are talking a bunch about it. But that doesn’t mean it’s cutting through. Indeed it could have the opposite effect (ie Puerto Ricans hear about it and realize a comedian made a joke yet the Dems think this is the end of the world).
Republicans with large Puerto Rican constituencies are doing damage control. They think it could be cutting through. I don't think it will - but very obviously it is provoking more of a response on both sides than the usual "politician insults opponents in a way which demonstrates a lack of civic virtue" story.
Compare and contrast the response to "Puerto Rico is a trash island" to the other seen-by-the-PMC-as-unsayable things said at the rally - nobody is surprised by a watermelon gag at the expense of a black conservative, or the false claim that Midtown Manhattan isn't safe for a lone woman at 10pm. Or compare to the token performative outrage at Musk putting out ads calling Harris a "C-word" - again, it doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know.
More options
Context Copy link
Within 24 hours of Tony's joke, I saw the Kamala campaign go all-out with some rhetoric to help/'save' Puerto Rico. Like they saw this as a moment to seize and run with, but it just radiates opportunism and desparation.
There's an insufferable, overprotective maternal vibe the Dems give off when talking about blacks or LGBTQ or whatever else. Extending that act to a stale PR joke is quite a look, and I don't know anybody who is impressed with it.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link