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 -
A physician was able to have a live-in cook and nanny because things were bad for cooks and nannies, not because things were good for physicians. It's like saying "150 years ago a physician was able to keep a slave. Quality of life has gone down for physicians", except less extreme.
Are the living conditions of the lower-class absolutely worse than a couple centuries back?
Is it worse to live in a comfortable household working for smart people than working a Walmart job (or several) you have to drive to, pay rent, pay medical bills, etc...?
Out of all the jobs one could do in the 18th or 19th century, working for physicians was probably not among the worst.
On one hand working conditions have greatly improved in many ways, with fatalities going down (at least in the West, while importing from dangerous facilities still operating elsewhere). On the other hand it seems that the general quality of many things that matter to the human experience has degraded.
Is it better for a black man to work hard in a field for a white master, who provides food, shelter and medical care, sometimes even education, or to be nominally free in a society where the food, shelter, medical care and education are still largely organized and provided by white people, but with no meaningful work, structure or community to speak of?
Is it worse to die under the lashes of an abusive master or "in mutual combat" with another "free" black man?
I'd be curious to see the rate of violent death of young black men then vs now.
I would wager that the under-class of a 100-years ago was somewhat more literate than the current one, and perhaps better-mannered. At least I'd imagine the ones that did have access to education ended up more literate than now that education is ubiquitous. I believe religion and family were more important, terrible life choices were possible and had direr consequences than now, but were actively discouraged, rather than incentivized, by society.
The most conservative Amish seem to be technologically-backward, and I don't know what economists would say about their economy, but they seem to live peaceful, well-organized, productive lives with tight-knit communities able to lift up their members in times of weakness.
Collectively, American society does extend a helping hand through government programs, churches, charities, technological innovations, but it's still hard for those who suffer of obesity, broken families, lack of meaningful employment, lack of adequate medical care, drug use, to be told that 'everything is fine, no, better than ever'.
The abusive master is far worse. Being enslaved sucks donkey balls. Fuck slavers; that dude in the ghetto is at least nominally free, he's not liable to get bought and sold like a fucking cow, and he has at least nominal rights. He may be killed by cops or something, but even if he gets murdered by really goddamn bad cops they have to at least half ass hiding the body. And this is being rather uncharitable about our hero's rights.
While the idea of freedom is an interesting one, I do not believe that there is anybody free of any master. One can only hope for a gentle master.
If it's not a literal slave to a planter, he probably is beholden to some type of landlord. Anybody living on welfare is at the mercy of some policymakers changing eligibility rules or other people's money drying up. He's also a slave to his passions (sin).
I suppose it's a matter of degree, but at least in the 'hood you're not being treated like literal livestock. Tyrone is free to walk out of the hood and go where he likes; if he wants to go to a new city, nobody will be hunting him down with bloodhounds and mutilating or killing him if they catch him.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link