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 -
I know I'm late to this but there are significant reasons to doubt the guilt of Leo Frank. I'm not going to get into them unless you want me to, but even if you find these reasons unconvincing it's beside the point—there were legitimate reason for the ADL founders to believe that Frank was getting a raw deal. It's also worth noting that trials back then weren't the staid proceedings they are today. Newspaper reporters would take photos of the witnesses while they were testifying, and in that era that meant flashbulbs. Surprise testimony was common. Observers in the gallery would cheer and boo during the trial. The names of jurors would be printed in the newspaper. These and 200 other practices that would be unthinkable today were commonplace in trials that generated any kind of media attention, and the trial of Leo Frank was the OJ Simpson case of its day. Pointing to the fact that a jury convicted him doesn't have quite the same import as it would have if Frank were convicted today.
Huh, TIL. What's the Frank Did Nothing Wrong version of events, if you have time (or can point me to somewhere)? Is there an explanation for who left the "the black guy done killed me" note?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link