site banner
ZorbaTHut  2yr ago (text post)   31617 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 17, 2022

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.

16
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You speak at length about how kind the police are. It's a very moving picture! But amidst all that praise, I forgot something, asking you to clarify for me --

Were these people voting illegally?

Were these people voting illegally?

I addressed this in my first two links. Your question is not so simple because so much of it depends on the whims of various bureaucrats scattered throughout the state because of how convoluted the system for tracking court fines is. It's possible for a felon to pay every single outstanding fines he knows about, and then (legally) registers to vote. But then the next day a court clerk opens a dusty drawer and finds out there's a $3.50 outstanding fee still owing and boom suddenly that voter registration is no longer valid.

I addressed this in my first two links.

I know you did. I asked the question to move the topic away from the irrelevant behavior of the police back to the important part: the criminality or lack thereof.

Apologetic police don't have any bearing on guilt.

IANAL, but the relevant statute may be here:

104.16 Voting fraudulent ballot.—Any elector who knowingly votes or attempts to vote a fraudulent ballot, or any person who knowingly solicits, or attempts, to vote a fraudulent ballot, is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

Knowingly seems relevant. Particularly, if election officials in the state of Florida told them that they were eligible to vote, as appears to be the case, it seems like the State has a high hurdle to climb to argue that they knowingly voted a fraudulent ballot and that they are guilty of illegal voting.

It also seems like even the state of Florida didn't even know whether they were eligible to vote or not.

I think it is actually 104.15:

Unqualified electors willfully voting.—Whoever, knowing he or she is not a qualified elector, willfully votes at any election is guilty of a felony of the third degree,

Well, if Florida's mass-arresting people it doesn't have a reasonable suspicion broke the law, then all the leadership involved should duly suffer.

It also seems like even the state of Florida didn't even know whether they were eligible to vote or not.

Then why did the state of Florida tell them they could?

Your local voting registration office is not a source of truth in this matter. If some low level functionary misstates the law, then that doesn't make it so.

It's a good question. Local officials were told by Florida's Office of Election Crimes and Security to do the process as best they could and that they wouldn't be at fault. Probably it'd make the most sense for Governor DeSantis to order an investigation of whoever the Office of Election Crimes reports to, as the big fuck up seems to be there.

Probably it'd make the most sense for Governor DeSantis to order an investigation of whoever the Office of Election Crimes reports to, as the big fuck up seems to be there.

golf clap

Only after the state lied to them and told them their voting would be legal.

Why frame this as a lie?

It seems like the election folks screwed up saying these people could vote. It also seems like these people messed up by voting when they shouldn't have.

Contrary to how some partisans pretend, there need not be any deliberate wrong doing or crime here.

If it can be proven that they were lied to, I certainly hope the liars in question are prosecuted.

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