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 -
Russia is an authoritarian regime that doesn't respect secular liberal values, allies with muslim terrorists, and oppresses its own people. Anyone fighting such a regime, and preventing its incursion into Europe, is defending Western civilization.
England and Germany are also both authoritarian regimes that don’t respect secular liberal values. Australia locked people in quarantine camps against their will only FOUR years ago. Canada debanked a bunch of truckers because they were honking their horns. Various states in the US will de facto kidnap your children and castrate them.
At some point the west needs to remind itself what it means to be the west and what we’re supposed to be defending. Free speech, free expression, free association, parental rights, bodily autonomy; these are non-negotiable.
Russia doesn’t support these things either, and is clearly an authoritarian pseudo-democracy, but “the west” just keeps slipping, and the lack of contrast between us makes it harder to rile me into supporting a war to defend our values.
More options
Context Copy link
Whittling down an ever-shrinking population of young European males even more, to save Western civilization.
More options
Context Copy link
I do not share your "secular liberal values", and am not interested in maintaining them. The median European neither shares my values nor respects my inalienable rights, and are both willing to coordinate meanness against me and has a long history of cooperating with efforts at such coordination. Any claim that Europe is a bastion against Muslim extremism seems laughable on the face, given Europe's obsession with importing as many people from extremist Muslim countries as possible and their evident failure to actually suppress the extremism of their new citizens. Europe as a bulwark of "Oppression" is likewise laughable; the median European would prefer me to be imprisoned than living as I am.
"Western Civilization" does not, I think, have a definition that we share in common, so I decline appeals to it.
Of course Europe is not a bastion against muslim extremism, but I think that's simply a failure of Europeans being too optimistic about letting in highly religious immigrants, hoping they would be converted to secular values. Russia, however, openly sides with dagestani warlords and invites them to rape and pillage Europe. If I had my way, Europe and the US would be completely rid of both christian and islamic oppression. That's not possible right now, but it could happen someday. Defeating Putin's barbarian orc army is a start.
If your starting point in a negotiation is "let's defeat this army first and THEN we can rid the US of your chosen religion's oppression" it seems like you are not going to win a lot of new allies.
More options
Context Copy link
I am highly religious, as are many Americans. I am not interested in helping to build a system for suppressing Muslim extremism when it is self-evident that such a system will be used against people like me first and worst. Not when countries who don't want Muslim extremists could simply choose not to import Muslim extremists, and especially not when I strongly suspect that the enthusiasm with importing them is at least partially motivated by the hope that they'll form a reliable voting block against people like me.
I have no idea what this refers to, but would be willing to read up on it if you had a link. Meanwhile, we allied with child-raping drug dealers for twenty years in Afghanistan.
Yes. And then you wonder why I, as a Christian, am not enthusiastic about facilitating this process with my nation's blood and treasure.
You hate people like me. You'll harm us if you can. You are not a friend or even an ally. You are just as bad an enemy as Russia, and much more dangerous to me that Russia ever could be.
Not at all. I do believe in religious freedom. I just don't want to be governed by religious values, especially ones from outside my culture. I take issue with the way Christianity spread throughout the world, often by force, and displaced traditional European religions and atheism, but I don't blame individual christians for that.
It would not surprise me if you did have a conceptual package of things you approve of and are willing to tolerate that you've labeled "religious freedom". I see no reason to believe that this package has sufficient overlap with the package I maintain under that label, nor to believe that you are in fact committed to this package in any durable way long-term, such that I should base my plans for the future on the assumption that it will protect people like me or work in our favor. When the new arguments about how things which were previously normal are actually weird and harmful and need to be suppressed, or why things which were previously abhorrent suddenly are the purest reflection of human liberty and must be defended, I expect the model "liberal" to update cleanly and arbitrarily in favor of withdrawing tolerance from those who disagree.
Again, the part where Progressives were absolutely in favor of mass-importing radical muslims on the assumption that, in your words, they would "be converted to secular values." "Conversion to secular values" isn't gravity. It's a socially-constructed mechanism that the Progressive tribe built and maintains at considerable expense, and it is and always will be innately hostile to people like myself. Tolerance is not a moral precept; the idea that it was was something between a delusion and a deliberate con.
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