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 -
Yep. The phenomenon of scissor statements remains, I think, poorly understood, but I think it's a very real phenomenon.
Have you ever had a very close friend or loved one experience a serious stroke, or head injury, or similar? The recovery arc is similar (six months, perhaps one year of improvement, followed by a pretty hard plateau) but the specific symptoms are wildly unpredictable. Sometimes it seems to map to known brain region issues, so like, damage to the frontal lobes turns sweet people surly, as in the classic case of Phineas Gage. Bilinguial have been known to lose the language of their childhood, or the language of their adulthood, but not the other one. Sometimes brain functions seem to fade in and out, particularly if the recovered patient doesn't get plenty of sleep--hypersomnia is a common long term effect of brain problems.
Depending on the severity of injury, it's common for those with brain injuries to need a guardian, conservator, or similar legal arrangement to protect their interests. This might be because spotty executive function makes splurge spending a problem. It might be because the recovered patient is easily suggestible, or incapable of grasping the full consequences of their actions. And sometimes it will seem like they are actually fine, for a moment or a day or a week, and people will wonder whether it's really necessary to treat them paternalistically. In the ideal world, they have a close loved one who can navigate these problems for them in a way that is a dynamic blend of cooperation, leadership, and care. But there's no question that brain injuries often end marriages, when the healthy spouse can't or won't commit to bearing that burden for the rest of their life.
I can't know for sure whether Fetterman is functionally unaware of his surroundings, since he has ("inexplicably?") refused to release his medical records. But he doesn't seem coherent to me. Having a Senator who may have spotty executive function, or be easily suggestible, or have a limited grasp of the consequences of his actions, seems like a recipe for disaster. The possibilities for espionage alone are enough to be worrisome. Watching his wife function as his handler--and having President Biden say Gisele is "gonna be a great, great lady in the Senate"--suggests very strongly to me that Fetterman is going where he's told to go and saying what he's told to say. Whatever personal autonomy he's managed to keep grasp of, I'm very skeptical that he is functioning at baseline human autonomy levels, and certainly not at a level we should want for people who get national security briefings, vote on major legislation, etc.
More options
Context Copy link