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 -
Well, you're a bit behind the times, because even BLM fell out of fashion post-Rittenhouse, it's all about trans issues now, which will also fall out of fashion because of the medical scandal around transgender care for minors.
I sympathize with the pushback against being psychologized, since as you rightly point out this is something anyone can do to anyone, but in my opinion the mundane theory just doesn't hold water. If there was pressure from below, you shouldn't have seen accusations of of nut-picking in the past. If there was pressure from below you shouldn't see wokeness having to rely on censorship, shadow-banning, and algorithmic supression. If there was pressure from below, you should see that Harry Potter game bomb in terms of sales, and fuddy-daddy game journos struggling to explain it. Everything about these mundane explanations flies in the face of observable reality.
It seems pretty brilliant from where I sit. It's like fighting a hydra, for every head you chop off, two new ones take it's place.
What is the end goal of all this, in your view? Culture wars to avoid a class war? If so, why now and not, say, 20 years ago?
The end goal, or the likely outcome?
The end goal is obvious. A prosperous, equitable society free of injustice, poverty and oppression.
The likely outcome is a very large pile of skulls, when society passes some critical point and abruptly and catastrophically decoheres. Most, perhaps all of the precursors for that eventuality are already baked in to our social reality; we're now just rolling the dice until we hit snake-eyes.
Why not twenty years ago? Because that's how policy starvation works. Twenty years ago, or fifty for that matter, the easy, palatable solutions hadn't been discredited yet, so people overwhelmingly went with them rather than with the ravings of the extremists. After decades of effort those moderate solutions all failed and were discredited, so now consensus is falling in behind the radicals. The radicals are likewise failing, and so soon it will be the super-radicals and so on. Since their goal isn't actually possible, it will simply go on in this fashion until the system as a whole runs out of capacity to absorb the strain.
More options
Context Copy link
Answering that would require greater insight into society, and how it's run, than any of us can plausibly get, but something like avoiding class war does feel plausible to me. But the question of "why now" doesn't feel that relevant to me. Maybe they just didn't get the idea yet? Maybe it's a question of logistics - for certain things to happen, certain other things have to have happened before, and we weren't at that point yet? Maybe in the past class war itself served the same function that wokeness does now, but it got a bit out of hand, and had to be replaced?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link