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 -
As others mentioned in this sub-thread, racial identity is an important consideration but by no means is it the only factor supporting one’s quality of life. Economic prosperity counts for a lot as well. A rising economic tide is enough to cover a multitude of sins. But when that tide recedes, racial preferences remain.
For example, George Floyd wasn’t the only black man to have died in police custody. Nor was his death the only one recorded and sensationalized in the media. But the reaction to his death was so much larger—why? Because the COVID economy crushed people and they wanted a reason to vent their frustrations. The unemployment rate was something like 10 percent at the time, and people were locked in their homes and going stir crazy.
After reading (post-Floyd) about Arthur McDuffie, who was beaten to death by Miami police on December 16, 1979 despite having committed no crime, I would have expected that to spark nationwide rage. There were serious riots in Miami's black neighborhoods, but the cause failed to catch on nationwide.
I have to conclude this is because newspapers and TV stations outside Miami didn't cover it (but the black papers must have?!), so I guess social media made all the difference.
The OCR isn't great but yes, it was covered by multiple black and at least one "alternative anti-war" papers in North Carolina. Unclear if there was any rage associated or just reporting.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Is it though? It seems to me that this is one of the key points of disagreement between the intellectual/journalist class and the wider MAGA coalition. If you watch Trump and Co. opposition to immigration is almost always framed in either economic terms (jobs) or security (criminals 'waltzing' across the border unchecked), the preoccupation with racial identity is pretty much exclusive to PMCs and the specific subset of minority grifters who prey upon them.
Jobs and border security are topics safely within the Overton Window, yet correlated to racial identity politics fairly well. Politicians are allowed to talk about them while maintaining plausible deniability about being white identitarians. That’s the upside to civic nationalism, if you subscribe to the idea that Americanism is closely associated with European/white heritage.
How many of those criminals waltzing across the border are ethnic Swedes, Poles, or Irish?
And yet we see Hispanics breaking for Trump (allegedly against thier interests) and white identitarians breaking for Harris (again allegedly against thier interests), the rationalist who is deeply invested in identity politics might have trouble understanding what is going on, but to anyone else the the simplest explanation is the ovious.
The Democrats claim that no one cares about crime or the economy, just race is further evidence that democrats do not care about crime or the economy, they only care about race.
Don’t believe every claim you read. A post-election survey by the Associated Press shows that Trump won 55% of the white vote in 2020 versus 56% in 2024. He improved with Latinos (35% in 2020 to 43% in 2024) and blacks (8% in 2020 to 16% in 2024), but these remain small segments of the voting population compared to whites. Do the numbers suggest a racial reckoning for Democrats? Hardly—they just failed to turn out the non-white vote. In 2020, whites were 74% of the voting population; in 2024 whites increased to 75%. This in a country where the white population is declining in both percentage and real terms.
Trump won in 2024 for the same reason he won in 2016: the Democrats picked a terrible candidate who failed to inspire non-white voter turnout. The Democrats have a long-term formula for electoral success, they just have to get their heads out of their asses and pick someone personally likable. I am amazed at how hard this has been for them.
This more than "suggests" a reckoning this "is" the reckoning. The Democrats' electoral strategy for the last 30+ years has depended on keeping Blacks and Latinos on the Democrats plantation and this is why the people pushing Identity politic the hardest are all woke PMCs from Democrat controlled cities and/or Canada.
The nature of FPTP elections means that even a small shift in the effectiveness of a tactic can have big effects on the end result and these are not small shifts.
More options
Context Copy link
This is a racial reckoning for Democrats. A racial reckoning isn't when the racial block converts in-majority to the other side, but when it can no longer be counted upon as a racial block.
Due to the structure of the Democratic coalition and its distribution across various electoral units, Democratic victory across the national electoral landscape requires not just a preponderance of 'minority' voters, but a consistently high preponderance. Those voters are what make 'favorable' gerrymanders favorable in the first place by having narrow coalition majorities in as many districts as possible. Due to how a First Past the Post system works, if a coalition goes from a hypothetical 52% to 49% output- a swing of just 1% protest voting and 1% switching sides- a coalition goes from winning the electoral contest 100% of the time to 0% of the time.
This is why Harris 'only' getting around 80% of the black vote, and Trump doubling from 8 to 16% of the black vote was such a disaster for the Democrats' nation-wide results. The Democratic coalition in the modern urban-based PMC-centered format is/was dependent on 90%-ish alignment to maintain the degree of reach they did have outside urban centers. Worse than a nearly 10% drop from African American support levels earlier in the century, the crossover of voters is double the impact in a binary first-past-the-pos setup. Every drop below that is a 1% equivalent needed from elsewhere, and every crossover is 2% equivalent needed from elsewhere to make up for not only the lost vote, but the additional vote to the other party.
Moreover, voter consistency of a block hinges on the block never voting otherwise. The biggest predictors of how someone will vote is how their parents and family vote, and the biggest predictor of how that someone votes is how many times they've crossed party lines before. The first cross-over is both the hardest and the most significant, as the voter who has crossed over even one time before is far more likely to do so again, and the voters who are known to cross over are among the biggest influencers to get their families to cross over as well, until you have a critical mass of people who are no longer 'reliable' voters for the party. This is how voting blocks / electoral walls crumble.
The issue for the Democrats, going back to the coalition structure, is that the urban-based PMC-core model was the development of the Obama-era party, and the party coalition expectations were based off of his coalition. Except Obama's black and minority support was the exception, being exceptionally high, not the norm, or the level of expected support to baseline from. And as the normalization of Black voters defecting continues, the future reliability of the ethnic blocks is going to decrease, not increase.
As long as the Democratic party coalition continues to baseline off the expectation of Obama-era levels of support- and dismiss failure to meet it as a failure of turn-out as opposed to a transition in the degree of party loyalty of the ethnic voting blocks- they are going to continue to face the racial reckoning as the racial groups they reckon will overwhelmingly support them, won't.
I think it’s less a racial reckoning and more about them being pretty much outed as caring mostly about the concerns of the laptop class and their pet causes than actually running the country.
They don’t care that crime and drug use in cities is horrible. They care that nobody mentions it, and that they don’t put too many minorities in prison. This hurts poor blacks quite a bit because they don’t have the wealth to leave and go to lower crime areas. Working class jobs are a bit harder to come by because we’re importing millions of working class Mexicans and Hispanics willing to work for McDonald’s wages doing construction and restaurants and trash pickup. If you’re in that class, especially for blacks who have less education and fewer opportunities, this is a bad thing. But saying that is racist. And when people can’t get legit jobs and earn their money, crime looks attractive, especially if the authorities have outright stated they don’t want to prosecute crimes.
Environmental stuff, in abstract, I think is okay. The problem is that it’s basically being done on the backs of poor people. Costs are higher because we refuse to dig up the oil and coal reserves we have. We put huge roadblocks to development and manufacturing, often in the form of regulations. This might be okay for the elites who don’t care how much anything costs, but if you’re counting pennies, yeah the fact that your gas costs $5 a gallon matters. Tge fact that regulations have doubled tge cost of food matters.
People know that pattern by now. They watch Americans suffer, especially poorer ones, knowing that help is not on the way. At least not for natives. And that’s what hurts democrats. If you’re not needing something that the elites see as important, or you’re in the wrong social class, you aren’t getting help. Poor people in North Carolina are still sleeping in tents hoping to not lose their land. Immigrants in New York get fully funded EBT cards and free housing. And it’s not super surprising that people are turning away from the party of neoliberalism and lazy identity politics is losing support.
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 cannot honestly be attempting to claim that racial identity is not important to most black Americans of all socioeconomic classes.
I can.
More specifically I contest the words "most" and "all".
Oh boy.
I mean, this really is the central DR3tard article of faith. “Egghead white communists taught blacks to care about race. If it weren’t for them, black people would all be good old-fashioned American individualists.” It’s delusional. Sure, many middle-class blacks don’t go around screaming about race all the time. But I guarantee you most of them were raised, by their family members and not just by white liberal teachers, that their race and heritage are important. They’ve gotten “the talk” about how police can present a potential threat, and how they need to take extra care to put their best foot forward around white people, so as to not feed into stereotypes. When they see a news story about a black guy who got himself killed by police, there’s a little part of them that says, “That could have been me.”
You and guys like you are always smugly going on about how “PMC liberals” — your ever-present outgroup, whose machinations are directly responsible for every last bad thing in the world — don’t know what everyday, salt-of-the-earth black people are like, so they have to rely on the accounts of grifters pushing an agenda. (An agenda taught to them by, of course, PMC whites.)
But no, this is nonsense. We can see what black people are like and what they value not only by speaking directly to them — something which I’ve done thousands of times in my life — but also by observing their voting patterns, their choices of entertainment, the ways in which they choose to spend their private lives largely in the company of other black folks. They go to black churches, listen to black music (whether that’s hip-hop, or gospel, or Motown, or jazz), and watch black movies. They have a distinct culture, which tracks almost one-to-one with race, and they don’t see anything wrong with that. They’re not doing this for “identity politics”, or to get gibs from da white man, or because scheming communist white people are pulling their strings. It doesn’t mean they can’t productively interact with white people; many of them have white friends, or at least white coworkers. But they know who their people are, and their inner lives are directed primarily toward the betterment of their larger community. This is healthy and normal. It’s not a pathological behavior, and it’s not something “the PMC” taught them.
They aren’t responsible for literally everything that happens. But what they have is a set of objectively harmful luxury beliefs (for example identity politics), are insulated by their money from the consequences of those beliefs, and because they have much more time to be politically active, and have more money to throw to NGOs that say things they like to hear, they have an outsized influence on politics. It’s the “make middle class women clap” phenomenon that’s been going on for decades. Political leaders listen to them, artists listen to them, etc. because they have time and disposable income.
I don’t think they invented blacks or Hispanics caring about race. They’re minorities, and banding together to solve problems is simply how problems get solved when you don’t compromise the majority of your area. Hispanics do the same. The big difference is that until recently whites were a big enough majority in America and Western Europe that whites didn’t feel the need to do the same thing. Christians didn’t feel the need to band together before because they had a supermajority in elections and therefore their issues were dealt with. The reason so many here don’t like PMC liberals is that the issues that are brought up by whites and Christians are issues that PMCs oppose as backward and uncouth and so on, and they’re thus funding and working for groups that oppose white identity politics.
Do they ever
MacKenzie Scott, Bezos ex wife, used the gigantic Amazon divorce money she got to spend 16 BILLION dollars on hundreds of NGOs
These billionaires divorces are worse than Soros
Well yeah. It’s how politics works for the most part. For rich people it’s a sport and they have tons of free time and money to spend bankrolling things that they can brag about at dinner parties. And for the most part that’s all they care about. Palestinians are a popular cause because the Israelis on TV mostly look like Europeans, and the Palestinians are brown. Besides, saying Islam has a violence problem makes them feel bad.
Uhh, have you seen palestinians? While I'll grant you they're a shade browner than Israelis on average, this is a conflict where both sides could easily pass for Italians.
I find westerners in general really overestimate how dark Levantines are.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
No matter how much you might sneer at it, DR3 (ie "Democrats are the real Racists") remains objectivly true.
Who is the real retard then?
DR3 is absolutely not true. A legit white racist, especially in the South or Midwest, will almost always vote Republican. Democrats discriminate against white people, so no racially conscious white outside of weird online people will be convinced by the racism of the Democrats because this racism is directed against them.
What dr3 is saying is that paternalist racially conscious identity politics performed by the democrats is more racist than any republican, even the deep south caricature everyone imagines when you say racist. They dress it up in fancy language and performative compassion, but don't actually give a shit what happens to the community or what the people there think or want.
It is one hundred percent correct, but unlike its brother 'what if the positions were reversed' is a poor argument for right wingers because it assumes the progressive framing is correct.
No that’s not DR3. That’s a rationalists’ steel man of DR3. DR3 by standard conservatives is literally Democrats are the real racists and there’s essentially zero Republican racist and there have essentially never been any either.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Assuming they’re racist against nonwhites, yes.
Well I’ve heard some pretty hot DR3 takes where they act like the Ku Klux Klan are woke SJWs. I got into an argument recently with a irl standard conservative that said if 1920s KKK came back they’d be Dems. I was like you think they would support the party of a half black, half Indian woman who supports laws discriminating against whites and he said yes. This is something you’ll see in main stream conservative discourse. They think there’s essentially zero white Republican racists and any that exist are Democrats. Just look on boomer conservative FB pages for anyone who doesn’t believe me.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
You didn’t even refute anything I said. Do you have specific evidence — even if it’s just anecdotal! — to demonstrate that what I’m saying is untrue?
My evidence is that of my own eyes.
I live in a decent sized southern city, and as fantastical as this may sound to the average mottizen such as yourself, black people are out there, right now, wearing clothes, driving cars, and running buisinesses as if they were human beings. While the streets are clean, and reasonably well maintained, and homelessness is rare.
Who are you to tell me that they aren't?
I was just in Louisiana for work and the black neighborhoods were absolutely terrible.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=hGkOcuCvqeA&pp=ygUXTW9ucm9lIExvdWlzaWFuYSBnaGV0dG8%3D
More options
Context Copy link
I mean his point isn’t that they aren’t doing those things, it’s that they have a very strong racial consciousness and sense of all non African races as being The Other
More options
Context Copy link
Hoffmeister25 was just paraphrasing a very widely discussed Pew Research Finding and talking about the potential reason behind the non-controversial fact that "Black people care more about being Black than white people care about being white." There's an order of magnitude difference in the proportion of people giving the most extreme poll response.
More options
Context Copy link
What an absurd comment!
Who ever said they aren’t? Certainly I didn’t! Do you believe that caring about racial identity is incompatible with wearing clothes, driving cars, and running businesses? I care about racial identity, and it doesn’t prevent me from having a job and wearing clothes!
Your comment is a complete non sequitur. I’m struggling to figure out what point you thought you were making.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
"I'll see your DR3, and raise you a DR4".
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link