site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 30, 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.

8
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The noisy bit of the non-profit sector is unproductive. But the big numbers in non-profit employment are in service provision in fee-charging or government-contracted non-profits - the most visible examples are church and university-owned hospitals; private, parochial and charter schools; and private universities.

Government-contracted non-profits have essentially the same problems as government-contracted for-profits. Fee-charging non-profits like university-owned hospitals are notoriously run in exactly the same way as for-profits, including the "sometimes making huge profits" bit. In general, I would say that service-providing non-profits are only unproductive in a Sturgeon's law kind of way which also applies to the for-profit and government sectors.

But the big numbers in non-profit employment are in service provision in fee-charging or government-contracted non-profits - the most visible examples are church and university-owned hospitals; private, parochial and charter schools; and private universities.

I guess we'll have to see the numbers. I agree that those institutions are productive, or at least no worse than private or government alternatives.

I do wonder how many people are in the activism and awareness space. I seem to come across a lot of them in my personal life. I try not to wince when they tell me what they do.

Top 10 registered UK charities based on paid employee headcount - not sure how I would find the equivalent for the US. Registration is optional for universities which is why they don't dominate the list.

  • SAVE THE CHILDREN INTERNATIONAL 18409 - Fundraises from the public, mostly doing foreign aid stuff. Some advocacy work, but not as much as, say, Oxfam, so most of the staff are on direct work.
  • NUFFIELD HEALTH 17165 - Fee-charging non-profit which operates a chain of private hospitals and a chain of gyms.
  • THE BRITISH COUNCIL 9861 - About 1/2 of the budget is language schools (fee-charging with some UK government subsidy) and 1/4 is handing out scholarships for overseas students at UK universities (ultimately UK government funded). The other 1/4 is annoying nonprofit stuff.
  • THE HALO TRUST 9741 - Removes landmines on UK and foreign government contracts
  • United Learning LTD 9144 - Runs charter schools, mostly on UK government contracts
  • MSI REPRODUCTIVE CHOICES 8993 - Runs sexual health clinics in 37 countries - funding is a mix of UK and foreign government contracts and fee charging.
  • ROYAL MENCAP SOCIETY 8009 - Does some fundraising and advocacy, but about 80% of the budget is providing mental health services under UK government contracts
  • BARNARDO'S 7317 - About 1/2 of what it does is running childrens' homes under UK government contracts, the other 1/2 is advocacy.
  • THE NATIONAL TRUST FOR PLACES OF HISTORIC INTEREST OR NATURAL BEAUTY 6651 - Operates a range of heritage attractions (particularly famous for the stately homes and the trailhead carparks in the UK national parks), mostly funded by admission fees. Has an advocacy arm which makes a lot of noise on a tiny budget because it has become a kind of clearinghouse for wealthy retired NIMBY Karens.
  • CARDIFF UNIVERSITY 6032 - Does what it says on the tin.

So I would say across these 10 names 20% of the activity is annoying nonprofit stuff and 80% is providing services on a commercial or government-contract basis. My guess is that the US figures would be even more skewed because of the large number of nonprofit-owned hospitals in the US.