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 -
On Elections: Kamala Harris became the presidential nominee without without participating in or winning any primary elections. They essentially just made her the nominee and everyone kind of went along with it.
One encouragement of violence: Kamala in 2020 during the riots - "They're not gonna stop. And this is a movement, I'm telling you. They're not gonna stop. And everyone beware, because they're not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they're not gonna stop after Election Day. And that should be—everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they're not gonna let up, and they should not, and we should not."
On promises to let perpetrators off the hook: In 2020, Kamala Harris spoke to Jacob Blake on the phone and visited Kenosha where she called for systemic change and justice and condemned the police shooting of Blake. Blake was a felon who resisted arrest, then reached for the floorboard of his car where a knife was located while police were right behind him. Back in June of that year, she told people to chip in to the Minnesota Freedom Fund that was posting bail for protestors and rioters. This year, Joe Biden commuted the sentences of 37 death row inmates.
It is true that the conservative movement has attempted to retcon plenty of easily-identifiable and unsavory behavior, and that Trump is a justifiable lightning rod for many of it. What bothers people like myself about the other side though is that same lack of accountability for bad policy, but with an extra layer that involves them aligning with progressives who are committed to unraveling the culture of Western society. This sort of thing is occurring outside of Washington too, which is what makes it so much worse. All of our institutions have been heavily captured by this brand of progressivism and it has swept across the country and contributed to what I see as this unraveling.
Another thing that bothers me about these progressives is the real-time "retconning" or redefining that occurs when another progressive policy or movement is injected into the mainstream. There's always this air of plausible deniability or deflection when they start doing something. "You see, this thing we're doing, we're not actually doing it." or "Why do you care so much?" "DEI isn't prioritizing one race over another." To them, an action has a different definition depending who has committed it. When a conservative slaps you in the face, it's a slap. A progressive, on the other hand, strikes you in the face with the palm of their hand in defense against oppression.
It has been the constant play on words, the effective racialism or group scapegoating, the overt thumb on the scales in favor of "marginalized groups," the self-critiquing of our own traditions and not others, etc. Overall, it's these actions and arguments that all seem to stem from an "idea" or branch of critical theory that has attached itself to the brains of Western liberals. It's that "idea" that I'm against.
So, I think the difference between us might be that, for me, the negatives associated with Trump and conservatives are less significant than the broader impact of that "idea" on our society today.
This is absurd. Intra-party democracy is not an essential part of a democratic society. The open (in the broad rather then technical sense) primary is a relatively recent development in relatively few nations, so unless you believe the near every democracy except America since the 1970s was in some way deficient or illegitimate these two are not at all equivalent.
Even if this was contemporaneous with the riots, it was not about the riots, it was in context clearly about protests - and crucially, unlike Trump she was totally unambiguous when she condemned violence, unlike Trump who, even when he told people to go home, still spent 90% of the time whining about losing the election.
Here she makes a clear statement that rioters have no part in her coalition. Trump treated the Capitol rioters as misunderstood patriots.
This is such a strange comparison to make I can't tell if you're being serious.
Everyone on the left was doing this motte-and-bailey in 2020 and it angered me to no end. I had to worry about where I parked and which routes to take to avoid getting stopped for hours, surrounded, or have my car destroyed by BLM - whether you call them "protestors" or "rioters", I don't care. The two often bled into each other. And I was terrified that the protests would spread from downtown out to where I lived. They can all go to hell.
Of course Kamala condemned violence... but then she raises money for a bail fund for people that were arrested for violent acts during a "protest"/"riot". Watch the actions, not the words.
More options
Context Copy link
Your entire reply to me is a series of examples of you demonstrating the exact point I was making about retconning. I'm not even sure if your comment is real.
I typed out a longer reply, but I don't think I want to have this back and forth. You make patently false statements and you have a petulant Redditor tone that I loathe.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link