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 -
comparing this to the rittenhouse shooting is surprising. they're both clearly controversial, but opinion on the rittenhouse case was pretty clearly left-right divided. here there are plenty of 'liberals' sympathetic to the white guy who choked a black man to death.
It's the guns and not seeking out the dangerous situation. The purpose of guns is to make holes in people (and deer, but Rittenhouse wasn't going deer hunting). Making holes in people quite often leads to their deaths. So people imagine Rittenhouse getting ready to willingly drive to Kenosha, looking at his gun and choosing between two futures:
in future A he doesn't take it with him and doesn't shoot anyone
in future B he takes it with him and shoots somebody dead
Yes, future B includes outcomes like "he takes it with him and doesn't shoot anybody because people don't pick up a fight with a man with a gun, or with a man with a gun that chambers a round, or with a man with a gun that points it at them, or they pick a fight with him and he shoots and wounds them", but as firearms instructors say, if you aren't willing to shoot someone dead, don't carry a gun.
More options
Context Copy link
Those are liberals who ride the subway.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link