site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 2, 2023

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.

11
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

No. The philosophy of appropriating capital has predictably catastrophic results for capital-holders, however small. Perhaps Marx can't be blamed for that by some lights, but I think reading his exhortations in the Communist Manifesto makes it clear that he was enthusiastic about appropriation. Living conditions wind up terrible in the aftermath of this central policy choice, predictably and universally. In any case, the claim above is about Marxism, not Marx personally; surely one man can't be held responsible for various implementations of a poorly thought-out ideology from a century earlier.

In stark contrast, capitalist societies have thrived and consistently improved the living standards of people living with that set of rules. If you want to blame capitalism for living conditions in, say, West Virginia coal-mining company towns, I will agree that capitalism is responsible for that intolerable set of conditions. This will not add up to anything like the crimes encouraged by communism.

but I think reading his exhortations in the Communist Manifesto makes it clear that he was enthusiastic about appropriation.

Certainly. Appropriation, however, doesn't necessarily translate into murder. Likewise, capitalism doesn't require the deaths it caused, but if we're talking about deaths under a system's means of economic production, then I don't see a way in which you count, for example, the Holodomor as a death under Marxism but exclude the Great Bengal Famine of 1770 from the capitalist side.

My point is that you have to be consistent.