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 -
I’m not sure any of that it possible unless all of Europe does the same. Europe has free transit across borders, so immigrants can get citizenship at the easiest point, then cross borders until they end up in a rich European country. The US has the same problem— a state refusing immigrants would be forced to accept them because California does and the lack of borders between states means a sort of race to the bottom.
From the point of view of the European populist right, yeschad.jpg. The European Parliament effectively forces political movements to organise at a pan-EU level, and the populist right is getting better at it. The bottom-up movement to curtail Muslim immigration is inherently pan-EU.
Also, the problem as perceived by the marginal right-populist voter is irregular immigration, and a lot of work on that issue (border policing, asylum reform, doing deals with transit countries to push "refugees" back) can and should be done at EU level, and increasingly is. Contrary to the "woke EU" memes spread by the Brexit campaign, the EU institutions have proved themselves perfectly willing to actually do anti-immigrant things where the member states let them. The EU (largely under the influence of Eastern European conservatives) has produced
A public statement by the Commission President (effectively the head of the EU executive branch) that countries deliberately facilitating the transit of unwanted immigrants are engaged in a "hybrid attack" on the EU.
A uniformed EU border corps (Frontex). Frontex also has a coast guard that actually turn migrant boats round and send them back (see wokist wailing and gnashing of teeth), rather than acting as a water taxi service. This Samo Burja briefing (unfortunately behind an expensive paywall) provides confirmation that Frontex is for real from a non-establishment source.
The Dublin agreement to stop asylum shopping. (Leaving the Dublin agreement as a side effect of Brexit is why the UK now has a "small boat" immigration crisis that we didn't when we were in the EU)
A deal with Turkey to return Syrian refugees who settled in Turkey before illegally immigrating to Europe.
The only reason why the EU isn't funding border fences is tit-for-tat budget politics.
"If we want to keep the infidel out of Europe, we need to work together" has been a truism of European politics for almost 1000 years by now.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link