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 -
The cultural distance between a 21st century British aristocrat and a Pakistani cab driver in Lahore, is less than the cultural distance between a 21st century British aristocrat and a 19th century British aristocrat. For starters, 19th century British aristocrats didn't go to Wimbledon. Also, they believed in a religion that no longer exists in the 21st century.
I don't think that religion has ceased to exist to the extent you are suggesting - my experience is that actual aristocrats in England are disproportionately either trad-Catholic (like Jacob Rees Mogg, but less unhinged) or old-time Anglicans whose faith would have been perfectly comprehensible to the high-Church Victorians. The late Queen was mildly exceptional in being a more evangelical kind of Anglican, but the royals were always slightly declasse compared to the established English noble families. (Note that even Victorian high-Church Anglicanism was something American evangelicals would have considered cucked).
One area where the old-time religion has largely ceased to exist (at least for Protestants and American Catholics) is that even the more conservative branches of Christianity struggle to condemn divorce and take it seriously. The British Aristocracy divorce less than American elites (particularly Red Tribe elites), but often enough for it to be embarrassing.
The version I am more familiar is that they are parvenus, having come over from Hanover in the 18th century. This is only partially fair - the late Queen comes from old-established Scottish aristocracy on her mother's side, and of course the Prince of Wales comes from bona fide English upper class stock through the Spencers.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link