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 -
It is worth noting that only a small minority of rich, socially responsible Americans drive with adequate liability insurance for the traditional libertarian argument to apply. Most drivers have state-minimum liability coverage, which is something like 25/50 for bodily injury in most states. Even "full coverage" is only 100/300. $100k is not nearly enough to cover a wrongful death or a disabling accident, and probably not enough to cover a broken limb. So the only people who could plausibly claim that their driving safety was between them and their insurer would be the small number of people with 100/300 insurance and a multi-million personal umbrella on top of it. (The UK travel insurance industry treats £2 million umbrella liability coverage as the bare minimum for Brits planning to drive in America).
This raises the question of whether irresponsible Americans impose a larger burden on responsible Americans by commiting crimes or by un/underinsured driving. Looking at the cost-of-injuries tables on https://wisqars.cdc.gov/, the total "cost of injuries" (including medical bills, time off work, quality of life costs, and VSL for fatalities - this is an estimate of what a sane personal injury system would award in damages) is $440 billion for violent crime and $820 billion for car crashes. Given that just under half the car crash number is self-inflicted, and most of the cost is driven by accidents which comfortably exceed policy limits, the answer is that as regards injuries, the two problems are roughly the same size. (I don't know how you would compare the cost of property crime to the property damage caused by car crashes)
More options
Context Copy link