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 -
The examples listed are progressive, which is related to but not the same as "left wing" (which is more particularly about democracy, or at least republicanism, though at one time this was properly "progressive"). In some sense, conservatives are shielded from mistake theory because they are focused on doing what has already been proven to work. The failure modes for progressivism and conservatism are different. Progressive politicians make mistakes; conservative politicians ossify. It can be a mistake to ossify, but people who are overcautious miss out on rewards (and may thus be outcompeted), while people who are undercautious fail more spectacularly (but may reap more substantial rewards when they succeed).
I don't think it's evidence of political bias to notice that progressives are more prone to costly mistakes; it's baked right into the cake. If they didn't take more risks, they'd just be a different flavor of conservative.
(EDIT: On reflection, this may help to explain the ethos of the "Grey Tribe" somewhat... people in the ratsphere tend to be progressives, sometimes to the point of being accelerationists, but are often not "left wing." The Grey Tribe may be specifically sensitive to ossification in left wing spaces that other left wing people regard as "progressive" but which are actually just re-litigating yesterday's battles, today.)
If this theory were true, we would notice progressive politicians changing direction when their mistakes were revealed. They do not; they double down, until they start losing as a result. Then they quiet down in whatever area made them lose (they may still DO it, they just talk about it less -- thus less promoting of Drag Queen Story Hour, just as much funding for transgender Colombian opera).
TBF, They sometimes claim that whatever mistake was made by some minor part of the coalition somewhere over there.
They of course never answer why no one checked this minor and irrelevant faction despite their enemies constantly warning them and promising consequences for not doing so.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Do you think these examples dont have a direction in common, besides being changes?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link