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 is incoherent. Khrushchev was more right-wing than Lenin. Does that mean that Khrushchev was right-wing? Obviously not. There were hundreds of other governments on earth contemporaneously with his, and we can measure him against those governments. We don’t have to only measure him in terms of the local political context. Similarly, if one feudal lord was more liberal-minded than another feudal lord - more tolerant and indulgent toward his serfs, more kind toward women, only flogged gay men instead of having them hanged - that still doesn’t make him a liberal. We can actually compare governments between countries and time periods.
Liberalism didn't exist in feudal Europe. But someone like Thomas Jefferson, a slaveholder, was certainly a liberal by the standards of his time (and a pretty radical one), though he'd be barred from any liberal political party today (and most right-wing ones). Even if you wanted to measure Bush or Reagan against other contemporary world governments, it isn't as though there were a surfeit of openly fascist regimes on the world stage, since the end of WWII the vast majority of world governments at least pay lip service to democracy and liberal constitutionalism. Though I wouldn't disagree that there are and were politicians who were more right-wing than Bush and Reagan, sure.
To an extent, yes. But at a certain point certain political perspectives become so marginalized and irrelevant that to insist they be used as anchor-points for the definition of the political spectrum is to treat "left" and "right" as platonic ideals rather than convenient labels. If someone is going to argue that say Eric Zemmour isn't really right-wing because he doesn't advocate for the restoration of the Bourbon monarchy and the reinstitution of manorial dues that would just be ridiculous.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link