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 think at small scales it certainly can be. A Christian household where the main breadwinner, explicitly puts his children and wife above himself when using the fruits of his labour to sustain them and make them happy (something I see in the conservative families around me all the time), and their charity in looking after unfortunate souls in their family/town.
Acts 2:44–45 “And all that believed were together and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need
Has at least some overlap with:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"
Now that breaks down at scale, I completely agree, and absolutely in practice pretty much immediately, but there is certainly something there that echoes. Communal living can work at small scales with high trust (such as in a family or religious group).
It's as communist as it is monarchical: The legitimate head, lovingly leading, providing for and serving his family, who follow respectfully and gratefully.
Or democratic: a family taking each others concerns into account, searching for compromises between their individual desires and the needs of the moment that allow everyone to flourish.
....It seems to me that all three comparisons are backward, though. Christianity is churches, and churches are family, and families are the real thing; systems of government are the imperfect copies of them.
...And churches still do this today. Two chapters later, there's an example of what that actually looked like in practice:
Private property, yo.
Churches can be democratic (Quakers) or monarchical (Catholic), or at least different churches have different methods of leadership as do families.
But my point is that Marxism does have some overlap with Christianity,and just as feudalism does and so does democracy. Christianity contains within itself multitudes, and Christianity contains elements that are compatible with the divine right of kings, and elements that are compatible with Marxism and elements that are compatible with capitalism. It's probably one of the things that has made Christianity so successful as a religion. It contains Prosperity theology and ascetic Puritanism both. And it does share some teachings with Marxism.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link