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 -
Sounds like par for the course. There was a similar, albeit much smaller scale, scandal in my own home town a few years back.
Local councillor accused of getting favourable treatment for local developer to get planning permission when he shouldn't have, with allegations of cash changing hands. It came to light because the guy was dumb enough to dump his wife for a new, younger, squeeze and Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, so she immediately started blowing whistles left, right and centre about hubby's alleged dodgy dealings.
It was an entire, steaming mess: he was put on trial for corruption charges and convicted and went to jail for a couple of years. The ironic thing was the developer was also tried on similar charges but found not guilty. I never quite understood how one guy could be convicted for a crime that a different trial said didn't happen, and presumably so did he, because he appealed for a retrial but didn't get it.
After he got out of jail, it had wrecked not only his life, but his parents' life, because their business went under due to the needs of paying for his defence, etc. Paxton sounds to be getting off lightly by comparison, is the wife not salty about the alleged mistress or is this a case of "let's all keep face and pretend we're a happy family"?
The server firm also sounds "dodgy but the usual kind of thing", and if he never cashed in the shares and the company later went bust, he can probably claim this was all legit investing on his part in a business he believed would do well. Taking payments and not declaring them is also usual politician behaviour, it'll be interesting to see if he can get away with that.
It's worth noting that the wife is, by all accounts, an active participant in at least the cover up efforts if not her husband's actual (small scale)corruption.
So he's smart enough to make it a family affair instead of dumping his missus for the young hottie.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link