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 -
Statements like this usually aren't true. I guess if you take 'deplatforming' to mean only this very specific context, but consider how 'freedom of speech' was a much less-held value anwyhere in something like the 18th or 19th centuries than it was either today or in the 20th, and consider the regular 'censorship' (and the sort of censorship might vary a lot) of newspapers back then, worse has likely happened. Josh could just be put in jail!
KF focuses on the most degenerate, spergy, and loud creatures on the internet, though. While what's wrong with kathryn gibes or chris-chan is related to what's wrong with 'the left' in some senses i guess, there's a lot of difference - and learning more about the bizzare and retarded exploits of the recurring characters is genuinely useful, by characterizing the ways human action can go wrong and can be surprising (which is arguably why it's funny), seeing 'crazy ugly trans person threatens suicide, posts newest medical mishap' doesn't do that much to characterize progressives or trans as a whole. So ... what does KF actually do for the red team, exactly? That people are willing to directly make fun of individual weak, stupid, degenerate people directly, and can see examples of others doing so, is valuable in a sense - but how does this translate directly to a 'red win', whether that means more R votes or neoreaction, and how is it different than past magazines or communities doing something similar (which did not translate to wins)?
Even in the 18th century, there was somewhere with people who held the freedom to speak among the most important values they could list.
Top of the list, in fact. Number one of 10.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_States
notably there are a lot of things much worse than what's happened to kiwifarms, which is my point
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
For all the weird stuff that KF has done, what actually got them taken offline was posting true information about trans people.
KF did a lot besides that, but this is what I call "steelman Kiwi Farms." That is the site that deserves to exist but cannot.
More options
Context Copy link
KF isn't so much Red as a holdout of the old, irreverent internet culture. While I don't actually LIKE KF, I was glad that things like it exist. I didn't hate Tumblr, I thought it was funny until I saw the same stuff in my Facebook feed from real people I knew in real life.
If we're going to talk about Red vs Blue, In a sense the entire Blue Checkmark Cancellation Machine is just KF, but distributed among a mob that gets to feel On The Right Side Of History, and that actually does make an effort to hurt people in real life.
More options
Context Copy link
But then he would have committed a crime. That's my point. There's nothing in the US Law that says you can't use the internet to laugh at the things weird people do.
Well then we're working with an idiosyncratic definition of 'deplatforming', where if the emperor biden instated a 'conservative censorship committee', that'd be US law and therefore not deplatforming, and similar past instances where newspapers were shuttered for breaking contrived or broad laws also aren't deplatforming, which is the point
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link