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 -
Aren't the majority of abortions in the USA to underclass women? Ye's claim there were more black babies aborted than born in NYC.
I've not heard an economic argument from the pro-abortion tribe.
I don't think I've heard one from either side, but that's the point. The moral ground for either side is imovable and never addresses the other point.
I respect that many place importance on the morality of policy and laws on both the left and right, and I think that deontological rules are an important boundary for unchecked utilitarian thinking (which can go off the rails). But from my perspective, utilitarian thinking is mostly absent these days, in favour of emotional arguments that do not take into consideration the full range practical issues. Everyone seems very concerned about how wrong the other guy is, but not so interested in looking at why both sides are dreadfully unhappy with things. This is exacerbated by hot button issues like trans people, who are a minority minority, when there are huge day-to-day economic changes in the past 10 years.
I wish the government was more concerned with being a transparent public service that deals with things the private market tends to bungle, rather than invested in tit for tat status quo or promoting an idealistic agenda. To me this seems worse in the USA than my country, but it is present here too. And I don't think one side is better than the other in that regard, when so many of the messages are "the other guy did it first". Hold politicians accountable to being productive rather than performing.
Many of the arguments we get from motivated reasoning are poor. Often because they've been stitched together to carefully avoid falling outside the overton window or some electric thrid rail of their own tribe.
I would like to see the pro-abortion tribe argue for the economic benefits of limiting underclass reproduction. Making abortion more available to women whose children would be disruptive poor performers in school and be on the school to prison pipeline would likely be a net good. Arguing for it begins to look too eugenicist. The lefty pro-abortion tribe also tends to include people from racial constituencies that the argument would advocate for aborting.
I find it a better argument than whatever the current women's rights bodily autonomy argument is but I don't think they'd get the blue haired women out shouting that aborting black and brown babies is good for the country.
Many of the individuals or tribes have a tenuous grasp on rationality, rational arguments don't take hold.
It's difficult to argue / logic someone out of a position they did not logic themselves into. So much is vibes and feels.
It's just all so tiresome.
Which is your country?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link