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 you are conflating current popular views and ideology at the foundation of the US. It is written, of course, that all men are created equal, but this obviously meant something different then, because in America from 18 century up to 20th century there was explicit legal inequality between sexes, races and even economic classes. That was not because of some mistake or for the lack of alternative, but because of conscious policies that aimed to achieve outcomes that were deemed more important than the ideal of liberty.
Equality means many different things now. Hence I specified equality of opportunity and explained some of what that means.
The legal inequality between races was decided at a state level. The legal inequality between men and women was justified based on what people thought were relevant differences - just as one would draw today between children and adults. I'm not so familiar with the details of the economic distinctions, but I imagine that these were justified in terms of a conflict between liberty and equality - which doesn't mean that equality was a value of the American founders, just one that had to be traded-off against things like liberty.
To see how the egalitarianism (in this sense) of the Founders was significant, consider how there was no special place for aristocrats in the US political system - a great break with the norm in Europe. The idea that Joe the Plumber could rise to be of the equal legal status as George Washington was a revolutionary egalitarian idea. No royal family, obviously. In fact, in legal principle, this was possible even if Joe the Plumber was black. The values of the Founders were radically unReactionary and unAlt Right, which doesn't mean that they were left wing in the modern sense either.
It's true that there have been changes in the meanings of these terms, but when you ask the average Trumpist what's important to them, equality in the sense I specified is very important. They might not say "equality", but their attitudes towards elites, snobs, aristocrats etc. will reveal their values.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link