site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 23, 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.

6
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Mike Pesca interviews a reporter during the 2010s in Brazil on his new book, If We Burn: The Mass Protest Decade and the Missing Revolution

https://open.spotify.com/episode/62QiTDxfwA0g5WBD4RMXO6?si=8a7f222ee5124b7d

My brief summary of his account: In 2013 Brazilian leftists, anarchists and punks take to streets to protest bus fares. After about 4 protests things become violent/rowdy and police crack down, the media switches to become sympathetic with the protest. Millions enter the streets with various demands. Among those are right-wing soccer hooligans (the Brazil national football jersey becomes their uniform), who physically expel the original leftist protestors. Like, manhandling them off of the streets.

All protester criticisms are aimed at the popular left-leaning ruling party of the time, despite the president being somewhat sympathetic. Two years later, she's gone and far-right Bolsonaro takes power.

My commentary: These protests swelled to contain numerous amorphous groups from everywhere on the political spectrum. Social media, traditional media, and the government all had different levels of sympathy at different times. Though the chaos is unpredictable, the leftists started a chain of events that contributed to a far-right demagogue taking power.

The current thing: Similarly, the pro-Palestine protestors contain many overlapping subfactions. A Muslim may start chanting "From the river to the sea" believing it to mean "Kill all Jews", his cousin and a college student may join in thinking it's only about equal rights for Palestine. Another college student might join in knowing what the chant means, but not want to cause a fuss and shift focus away from the bombings. A third college student may think violent revolution is actually pretty cool and American Jews who don't speak up against Israel are valid targets.

I have no hot takes, the various overlapping factions make things chaotic and hard to draw lessons from. However, Western nations in 2023 are looking a lot like Brazil 2013, maybe this is our future. I would like to see Metaculus posts for "Will over 1 million protestors take to streets on any given day before 2025?"

Always has been.

The Nazis got to power by forming a coalition with Catholic monarchists. Everyone was invested in fighting the communists, who in turn "openly announced that they would prefer to see the Nazis in power rather than lift a finger to save the republic.”

Strange bedfellows have always been present in politics. I’d argue that the ability to accommodate bizarre coalitions without immediately imploding is what has given liberal democracy such a competitive advantage in history.

We’re starting to see the contagion of mimetic violence that Girard predicted. Except our myths are so fragmented that it’s difficult for people to even agree on a narrative - the violence for its own sake is becoming naked, stripped of its justifications.

Who do you (you plural, anyone can answer) think the Girardian scapegoat will be? Is it impossible to predict?

Define "our"

The USA’s I suppose? The West more broadly? I’m not attacking Christian beliefs or anything, but rather saying the people as a whole don’t believe the same things.

Great. Can't wait for 2025.

Add social media, LLM, AI deepfakes... Love this. /s