site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 31, 2025

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.

3
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I didn't know about the study. Would you share a link with me?

But also, the baffling part, regardless of why was it put there in the first place, legitimately or illegitimately, is the common sense of the situation: the playing ground was already there, less than a block away.

Unfortunately, it was a long time ago, maybe 20 years. I read it in an actual paper newspaper (maybe the Georgia Strait, if anyone remembers that, one of those free very left-wing weeklies). To be honest, I only remember it because it was a strong point in flipping me from a Chretien/Martin Liberal to conservative. Along the lines of if you agree to try a potential solution, it's permanent regardless of effectiveness, then it's better not to try anything unless you absolutely have no choice.

Though I think your second part is a little unfair. In a crowded city, there will always be a park or school or something with a couple blocks of the site. And I imagine that the proponents would assume that junkies would shoot up inside the site, rather than just outside it. It might even have the effect of reducing the number of junkies in the park.

Though I think your second part is a little unfair. In a crowded city, there will always be a park or school or something with a couple blocks of the site.

There are a few stories of that. IIRC, one city has "sex offender bridge", which is the only location within city limits that's more than X distance from Y locations, and therefore the only legal place for registered sex offender to live in the city.