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 -
You make a good point. But it's almost inconceivable to me that intelligent people would do things that provoke anti-Semitism when the anti-Semites literally say "You are making us anti-Semitic by doing this." Maybe they are as unwilling to believe that anti-Semites tell the truth about their own motivations as I am that the ADL tells the truth about theirs. Maybe their internal monologue is "Don't believe the anti-Semites, for they are using
Jewishgoyish trickery!"Look at that, I'm still speaking of the ADL as though it's a single mind and not a bunch of minds working together.
The logic of the anti-Semitic strongman ("we dislike you because you are censorious and hypocritical") is just so much more reasonable to me than that of the ADL activist weakmen ("they dislike us Just Because, and any explanation they give is a lie, Just Because") that I have to assume the latter is aware of the discrepancy on some level. Maybe I'm being insufficiently charitable to the latter, but that is how I perceive them.
As for the point you and others have made about how these people couldn't have cynical motivations without being caught, they could just be using coded language that only they understand, and refuse to let in anyone who says the quiet part out loud. Nobody ever says "get rid of cishet white men" they say "increase diversity". Nobody ever says "be racist", they say "be anti-racist". That sort of thing.
Along with what hydro said about how the ADL interacts with neonazis, "You are making us anti-Semitic by doing this." generally gets a response of "How dare you, we're just defending ourselves, this is victim blaming, this is abusive behaviour." And if you say "Ok well I'm not a neonazi, but it looks to me like you're a bit too gung ho about it, and you're getting false positives that make you look bad" they say "well of course, we're fucking terrified another 6 million of us will get thrown in the ovens."
And then you are trapped. You can empathise with them - because regardless of what facts you've heard, they have been brought up being told the nazis killed 6 million Jews and turned them into lamps and shit, which is a good reason to be defensive. Or you can try to dispute them and go the 'single issue' route - where no matter what you dispute or how, the very fact that you would dispute it serves as proof you shouldn't be trusted. It's like an organisational version of borderline personality disorder.
More options
Context Copy link
I think you’re overlooking something- the ADL is not listening to antisemites unless they need an example for a slideshow on why the problem they exist to solve is totally still a thing that they need more resources to address. People the ADL actually does listen to are busy assuring them that, whatever the stated reasons might be, antisemitism is rooted in historical prejudices and is apparently the one remaining holdover from medieval catholic attitudes.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link