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 -
Surprised to see less coverage of these points from the article:
Part of me wants to take some time to dunk here on the Defund The Police movement. The really do hate the most at risk communities. But, that's probably mostly fruitless, especially on the Motte.
The fact remains that Scott's article points to the fact that one of the most cost effective ways to reduce the occurrence of all crimes (leaving aside incarceration and rehabilitation dilemmas) is to have more cops all over the play. In one of Roland Fryer's papers, I seem to remember a similar conclusion.
The culture war angle to this is that, as long as I can remember, Cops have been the victims of cultural denigration on the left. This can range from the goofy-humorous (Chief Wiggum on the Simpsons, the trope of donuts, Sooper Troopers and smiliar movies) to the naked hostile; ACAB, Fuck Tha Police, 90s gangster rap that clearly identifies street cops as the primary bad guy in the hood (not the, you know, murderous criminals that kill the friends of the protagonist). Even more nuance depictions of cops often share tropes of personal failings and issues with leadership and corruption - Harvey Keitel in Bad Lieutenant, Matthew McCanaughey and Woody Harrelson in True Detective. The biggest pop culture cop show is probably Law an Order and its many spinoffs. Most of the cops here are pretty immaculate in their personal conduct, with the primary conflict in each episode generally being the dramatic discovery of a smoking gun or other key piece of information. Still, it being a drama, many episodes feature a less than comforting ending where a bad person goes to prison, but the victim is still victim-itized and has an implied hard life after the credits role. Law and Order: SVU had a rolling subplot about the emotional toll of those cases on the lead detectives.
Suffice it to say; the Culture War isn't great for cops. So, if one of the best solutions to crime is to have lots more cops, and we assume some sort of political minor miracle wherein we all agree on this and fund it, I worry about our ability to fill the ranks. Interestingly, this kind of dovetails with the other big thread this week on fertility collapse and population issues - women don't have good incentive to be Moms and we ought to improve the status of motherhood. Id argue that the status of cops - an implicitly male and patriarchal role - is also quite low and in need of some rehabilitation.
The unpersoning of Roland Fryer is quite telling. The whiff of possibility that the US 'carceral state' is not actually a product of systemic racism is so antithetical to the dominant intellectual theme that it must be quashed lest any doubt fester and spread to other 'systemic' narratives.
To recap, Roland Fryer is a black academic at Harvard who focused on racial disparities in minority vs white outcomes. He lead a successful minority-focused program (Opportunity NYC) that had positive ROI in terms of dollar spend to material outcomes. He is most controversially known for his 2016 paper on statistical encounters between police and minorities. Unlike the vast, VAST majority of black and minority studies academics, Fryer concluded that police encounters resulting in shootings or incarceration of minorities is statistically identical (if not actually less harsh) than white encounters when factoring in weapon possession, prior arrests, cooperation or other material factors.
https://jimgeschke.substack.com/p/the-rise-fall-and-redemption-of-roland
He was tarred and feathered by multiple academics subsequently, and a Title IX complaint against him resulted in his exile from academy.
The intense backlash against a successful black intellectual is quite fascinating, and identical to the contempt expressed towards any black man who explicitly rejects grievances. Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas and John McWorther. The common thread all these men have is that they do not accept that the USA is foundationally racist and that blacks failures are due to external societal factors.
The reason for costs spiralling in the USA for government spending is this externalization of responsibility: the state must prove that the disparate outcome is NOT due to the state failing an unspecified deliverable. The existence of the disparate outcome is taken as proof that the state - as the legal responsible entity of last resort - has failed in its responsibility and therefore must invest even more resources into whatever is required by these champions of the dispossessed. And when these proposed solutions - prison furloughs, death penalty appeals, welfare enhancements that differ by state, special treatment for self declared medical (including mental) conditions, redress of human right violations - fail to change recidivism rates, then it is taken as further proof that even more must be done.
The only way to break this cycle is for a criminal to accept their own responsibility and cooperate with the justice system. But with increasing resources afforded to the noncooperative, why would anyone consider cooperating? There is unlimited incentive to costlessly defect, and minimal incentive to cooperate. The prisoners dilemma fails in real life game theory because iterated games punish defectors in the next round. If there is no punishment now or forever for defecting, and the calculation is performed by do-gooder externals, then dr robotniks pressing that defect button with the biggest smile on his face.
More options
Context Copy link
There are in fact circles where becoming a cop is high status and seen as remunerating well. The police force pays quite well by the standards of a job requiring an associates degree(it doesn’t pay fintech level but nothing does), it’s a popular career option in many working class and culturally conservative communities.
But the qualifications for it are in fact difficult. MIP’s and minor pot violations are disqualifying; debt levels are restricted; physical health is checked. The police force is a most attractive offer to the bottom half of the middle of society, and well, a high percentage of the early twenties male population in working class America has a history of the sorts of very minor legal problems and health issues that preclude police academy but don’t impact a more regular career.
More options
Context Copy link
It isn't just the Culture War; the left isn't 100% wrong. We actually don't have angels in the form of police officers, and a lot of cops get into law enforcement because they get to exercise power over others. We also have a lot of laws which would allow them to do so legitimately. Greatly increase the number of cops, and even if you avoid the anarcho-tyranny trap and do reduce crime, you also make the place more of a stifling police state for people you wouldn't normally consider 'criminals'.
I'd argue this is 100% culture war. Has there been any study that replicates that can point to a major motivating factor of police recruits being authoritarian impulses? Related, is there any data that backs up the (goofy) claim that X% of people who join the military do so in order to be able to kill people.
How would such a study even be constructed? Self-surveys? Big 5 personality traits? This is exactly the kind of data that can always been squinted-at in just the right way so as to "back-up" a latent intent kind of assertion.
I don't know about the military claim, but I base my belief in that canard on my own perspective. I knew people as a youth who became cops and they were people who abused power in their teens and went on to abuse power as police. I have daydreamed about being an anti-hero, doing bad things for justice, could I resist the temptation to live out those fantasies if I was in a position to actualise them? I believe I could, I have been tested and stayed strong in the past. And I believe I could the second time and the third and fourth and so on for a while, but the 2054th time? The 20,743rd time? I like to think I would. I don't have that faith in anyone else on this planet however.
Beyond that though, we live in the era of justification. Everything can be justified if you widen or narrow your focus a bit! Principles are for contemptuous chumps and losers who are coping about their failure to win by any means necessary. The DNC came out and said they spent the entire campaign period lying to their supporters and the public in general, telling them they were winning when that was never true and people aren't mad at them for lying, they are mad at Joe Rogan for believing in dragons. That's for the highest office in the land and you think cops are going to be more honest? I'd guess nybbler was wrong saying it was a lot of people joining for power, but it definitely happens more than it should.
More options
Context Copy link
What difference would it make? If there were, you would (quite possibly rightly) accuse the researchers of bias. But have you ever met any cops? Did you know people in school who grew up to become cops?
Yes, a few regular cops, a campus cop, and a couple conservation officers. (All have arrest powers with varying jurisdictions. I'm using a slightly-broad definition, but nothing too crazy.)
I'll pit my anti-authoritarian anecdotes against your vague implications any day.
More options
Context Copy link
Yes. Dozens. Military as well.
None of the cops comes across as authoritarian-seeking power trippers. Most are deeply committed to the idea of justice. A minority are just doing what their Dads did. In High School, they were all athletes except for one who was just sort of a meathead.
I think both perspectives might be accurate. I lived in a conservative area and then a liberal area. The first was pretty pro-cop the second was not.
The cops coming from the pro cop area seemed universally better than the candidates coming from the anti cop area.
And talking to cops, they also tend to know who the shitbags on the force are.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Yes. Most cops expect to make a good living doing rewarding work that benefits the community, and have a job that is high status in the circles they tend to come from.
More options
Context Copy link
Yes, have you?
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