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 problem is regardless of the ruling, the DEI-pushers aren't going to change. Harvard (and other universities) will continue discriminating, the EEOC and other administrative agencies will continue to allow it, and the lower courts will mostly find rationalizations around the Supreme Court's decision. It'll be Heller and Bruen all over again, or Masterpiece Cakeshop, or that EPA decision discussed elsethread (which went to SCOTUS twice, showing that the first time didn't matter). When the Supreme Court rules for the right it generally has little effect (with the exception of Dobbs).
Bruen has had some impact, although at some point I do need to point out some of the state legislative and lower court massive resistance as a response to huadpe (though in turn, I expect huadpe will point to the absence of any Kim-Davis-level j'refuse). The first Sackett v EPA and Masterpiece Cakeshop were pretty overt and intentional punts (as was Fulton v City of Philadelphia and a few other noticable ones); .
But, yes, agreed more on the object level, here. We already have a lot of very strong examples of racially discriminatory preferences being explicitly banned, and then people simply jumping to the next pretense, just as we have a lot of examples of 'successful' courageous court cases over religious discrimination that have simply resulted in a shell game.
I upvoted and agree with this NYSPRA post as a factual matter (modulo some technical uncertainties I listed in reply), and it’s not wrong as a prediction. But I think the difference in subject matter focus to Nybbler’s concerns illuminates a ton of the disagreement in this sphere.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link