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 was already typing this out, so I figure I'll add it to the thread on PA elections to avoid being repetitive.
Two Faces of Trumpism: PA Statewide Elections Predict the Future of the GOP
TLDR: Trump as a political phenomenon in America can't be understood from only one angle. He didn't win by being this, or that, or the other thing; he won by getting some people to believe he was this, some to believe he was that, and some to believe he was the other thing. Two Trump proteges running in statewide races in PA this Fall give us a bellwether as to which of two versions of Trumpian politics will be successful going forward: Dr. Oz is the flip-flopping celebrity dillettante with no political experience and vague ideas as to why he ought to be in charge, Doug Mastriano is the hardened veteran culture warrior tough guy with frighteningly specific plans about what he'll do in office.
In the 2022 midterms there are two major elections in Pennsylvania, one for senator (seat vacated by Pat Toomey, pour one out for my former bar owner homie) and one for Governor (Wolf is term limited out). Pennsylvania has been arguably the swing state for two presidential elections. It's earning its nickname of the Keystone state, and its electoral map is a microcosm of the country with Blue islands on the East and West and Red up the middle. Pennsylvania is the best state to watch to see what the future politics of America will look like, and these elections are the best way to see how it is playing out.
After heavily contested primaries, both the GOP Senate and Gubernatorial nominations went to the candidate endorsed by Donald Trump. As far as I recall, every primary candidate tried to claim the banner of MAGA, all of them claimed to be ready to fight "the woke mob" and the liberal agenda. No squishy moderates here. In the end, the winners were the candidates Trump directly endorsed, not the upgrade Mitt Romney or barnyard Candace Owens. It's Trump's party now. But the two candidates represent divergent visions of Trumpism. Dr. Oz is a lightweight, a celebrity huckster with no political experience, who is either a non-devout Muslim or in a cult run by his in-laws, with no strong political opinions that can be traced back more than a year, long time ties to popular Democratic politicians and liberal causes, and no roots in Pennsylvania to speak of. Doug Mastriano is the opposite, a former Army Colonel and War College instructor, with years under his belt in Republican politics, a devout Christian and Nationalist (and maybe Christian Nationalist) who has recently decided to stop cooperating with subpoenas from the January 6th Committee. To put it in internet: Oz would fit right in on Instagram, Mastriano would fit right in on /r/themotte. Among Republicans in PA, I've run into a lot who they like one but not the other. Either "Oz doesn't seem that bad, and he must be smart to be a heart surgeon, and Fetterman's a bit whackadoodle...but Mastriano, his soundbites are so bad..." or "I can respect Mastriano, he has balls, but Oz is a fake."
And in 2016, I remember hearing both those things said about Trump by different people. He excited a lot of far-right sentiment that was sort of dormant prior, bringing out Evangelicals who were ready to wage the culture war in the open, and nationalists who were ready to build the wall; while at the same time he benefitted from being viewed as a moderate by a lot of people who knew him from TV. That was what put him over the top, and it will be interesting to see which version of this strategy is successful going forward.
Mastriano Wiki ; Theme music Highlights: Mastriano wants to cut state funding to public schools to the bone, with local reporting showing that staffing at local high schools would fall by 40-65%; Mastriano has stated that as Governor he would have the power to declare a Presidential election vote void in 2024; Mastriano is hilariously direct on Gay Marriage and abortion, wanting both illegal in every single case no exceptions no way no how; Mastriano was definitely at the Jan 6th rally, but probably didn't storm the capitol, although if he had he wouldn't have left a trace as the dude was literally a war college instructor on intelligence operations. People who like him like that Mastriano is a full bird culture warrior, his campaign slogans are mostly biblical references and his yard signs feature bible verses. His campaign also has some surprisingly funny spots given that I've never seen Mastriano so much as smile. I trust Mastriano to be exactly who he says he is, to the greatest extent he possibly can be within the system as it exists. He's running against Josh Shapiro, and I'm convinced that Shapiro keeps centering his devout Judaism in advertisements hoping he can bait Dougie boy into saying something vaguely anti-semitic.
Dr. Oz wiki ; Theme Music Highlights: Oz was a well respected heart surgeon before getting on Oprah, marrying into a family of cult leaders and becoming a full-time huckster and quack; he's taken liberal positions publicly in writing on topics like Abortion (says he saw how bad outlawing it was before Roe), Guns (wrote an op-ed favoring a federal assault weapons ban, and has argued in favor of Red Flag laws, a red line for me); he has never lived in Pennsylvania though he has lived near it his whole life, his listed address when he filed to run was his in-laws house, meaning that if he voted in the 2020 election in PA his vote was almost certainly fraudulent; in addition to still living in New Jersey he's still a citizen of Turkey, which I wish he would center as a positive ("Turkey has been an ally of the USA for 70 years, acting as a pillar of the free world against Communism and Islamic Extremism, and my dual citizenship will help us build ties with this key ally."). People who like Oz basically think he's more moderate than he's letting on, that he must be a smart guy because surgeon, and that he'll figure it out once he's in office. He's running against the guy they'd cast as Gritty if they made a live action adult themed mascot film.
So which Trumpism will succeed to the banner? Keeping in mind that PA is the swing state of swing states, Oz can never run for president without an amendment to the constitution, but it's quite likely that any of the other three candidates could be presidential/VP short-list contenders within the next decade if they become Governor/Senator. If Both win, then we're probably seeing a Red Wave, and Trump 2024 is a near certainty, because voters are embracing both the Christian Nationalist and Quack Celebrity Pseudo-Moderate strains. If Mastriano teaches Shapiro how to Dougie, but Oz quacks out against Fetterman, then it would seem that Trumpism has left behind the cable-tv popularity contests in favor of raw rightist culture warring, and if an anti-abortion extremist can win in PA then there may be hope for the pro-life movement nationally. If Oz beats up a stroke victim, but Mastriano loses to a Jewish government lawyer, then it would seem to indicate that Trumpian candidates are better off triangulating towards vague moderation than fighting for pure culture war idealism. If both lose, then the lesson would seem to be that only Trump is Trump, and other Republicans would do better not to try to follow him too closely.
Leaving aside, of course, the possibilities that for example people start really looking at what Swedenborgians do, or that Mastriano finally makes a Jew comment, or that Shapiro turns out to idk diddle kids or something, or that Fetterman literally dies. That's the problem with elections, there are too few of them and they're all unique, individual events can ruin the predictions.
Now I wish I'd delayed until morning; this was a much better write-up. It's interesting to see the difference in ad spending in different markets. I don't think I have seen a single pro-Mastriano or pro-Shapiro ad, just a few attack ads on Mastriano. Comparatively, Fetterman and Oz are both running tons of ads. Oz has a mix of positive and negatives, highlighting his medical experience in the former, and Fetterman's "weak on crime" policies in the latter. The affiliated PAC ads run hard on "CRAZY LEFTIST JOHN FETTERMAN", which makes me think someone saw the same thing I did in regards to John playing coy games with his party and positions. Fetterman's ads are mostly negative, going hard and explicit on the Othering - one of the common ones literally uses the phrase "He's not one of us." If the parties were flipped, we'd be having a national conversation about how Fetterman is an open white supremacist - but the accusation still has plenty of truth to it.
Edit: Speak of the devil, just saw a new Fetterman ad portraying him as tough on crime, brief pause in gun deaths in Braddock, yadda yadda. I guess the attack ads were having an effect. The new ad has a much more "PA accent" than any of the others I've seen, FWIW.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link