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 cope; you don't win by losing. The establishment(s) showed strength and ruthlessness with its response to January 6 and the Canadian trucker protest. You won't see major right-wing protests again in either country.
But there was no way a protest could "win" that day, the entire machine had already lined up behind a predetermined outcome. They could certainly have lost by going too far with the LARP but they didn't.
The main thing they could win is a public, well documented grievance. This has been difficult for the right because it suffers the death of a thousand cuts from third parties that can never be tied directly to the Dems. The grievance is useful when the system falls into crisis, it will naturally seek "reform" to reach a new equilibrium, and that involves the establishment feeding one of their factions to the crocodile, namely the parties responsible for the grievance. For example, an ordinary Joe might wonder "where did this new coronavirus come from?" as his life is completely upended in the Spring of 2020 (crisis). You don't want to answer that question, so you pull a grievance - "there are childrens bones under the school!" - feed some churches to the crocodile, reform, equilibrium, order restored.
This response to Jan6 has also created a highly useful as a Motte and Bailey: treatment of Jan6 prisoners and Fed infiltration is the motte, electoral corruption is the bailey. Vivek is now using this tactic: although he has not ventured into the bailey (AFAICT) he is establishing himself in a very reasonable and sympathetic motte.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link