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 -
One could argue they need racist bigotry more than anyone else on account of their tendency to favor outsiders.
If you're nice and cooperative to people who will be nice and cooperative back at you because they're the same kind of weird moral mutant, it's mutually beneficial.
It's not advantageous to you to be nice to some subcontinental who is far more ethnocentric and is going to ruthlessly take advantage of your niceness and then keep on lecturing you for years on how racist you are.
How to solve the problem of groups with different levels of favoring their own coexisting in a multiracial framework ?
It seems rather thorny.
Austro-Hungarian ethnic politics were kinda a handful and those were between peoples who were genetically almost identical and only differed by native language and a few cultural differences.
The Prisoner's Dilemma, pretty much. Of course, if you always co-operate, it's obvious what the action of your enemy is going to be.
More generally, this is why people advocate for ethnostates. Of course, states still compete with each other on a political level, so you're merely transmuting the stage of competition to a geopolitical one—unless you go all isolationist, of course, but that's pretty much akin to dropping out of the game entirely.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link