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 -
This talking point has been repeated ad nauseum but is it really true, though? I contend not: his candidateship brought an enormous influx of new members to the Labor party, resulting in it becoming the single largest political party by membership in Europe. The parliamentary Labor party evidently believed him to be unelectable—and did everything in their power to make sure that would be a self-fulfilling prophecy—but nevertheless under his leadership the Labor party made gains against the Tories in a snap election that Teresa May had opportunistically called to try to capitalize on Labour's supposedly weak leadership and Brexit position.
Corbyn was certainly deeply polarising, and in the end not an effective leader, but "unelectable" is not plausible except insofar as as his own party was willing to shoot themselves in the foot rather than risk finding out.
It absolutely is, the man is wildly popular with your stereotypical urban/university leftist types and nobody else. He managed to lose what should have been a walkover election against the wicked witch of the west.
The British public is not going to elect a Prime Minister that appears to reflexively side against Britain and with her enemies whenever the opportunity presents itself. The man just comes across as someone who never got over his "student activist" phase and that is not a reassuring image to present to the public when you're asking to lead the nation.
Labours leadership was weak, their Brexit position was weak. Corbyn couldn't control his own party and was evasive as to his Brexit policy because while he personally wanted to leave, the majority of his supporters wanted to remain. Both of these were also true for the Conservatives, who have been ineptly flailing since the 2016 referendum. The only reason that the Conservatives have managed to cling on to power despite being incredible dissapointments by almost every measure is because of the fear that the alternative is worse. It is not a coincidence that Labour is massively gaining in popularity and credibility as the party distances itself from its "loony left" and is at least trying to act like they aren't allergic to the British flag.
I've never seen or heard an argument in defence of Corbyn that doesn't come across as either willfully self deceptive or blinkered, from someone who really really wishes that Corbyn was secretly popular and that the only reason he lost was because of a massive conspiracy within the Labour Party and British media to trick the British public from ushering in the socialist paradise that they so desperately yearn for. It just seems very out of touch with "the man on the street".
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link