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 -
European countries have parliamentary systems, strong anti-immigrant majorities, and even worse problems than the U.S.
Even when they elect anti-immigrant parties, they never actually seem to reduce immigration. Giorgia Meloni, for example, has been a massive disappointment.
While I think parliamentary systems are better than strong presidential systems, I don't think it matters in this case. It's simply that elites are unwilling to make the hard choices to defend their country lest they be treated like Orban or Trump.
That's probably less a consequence of Meloni personally and more just the effects of Italy having gone through a period of very low fertility (dipped to 1.35 already in 1990 and hasn't gone up over 1.5 ever since) that has lasted for over three decades already, expectional even for a Western European country. At this point of time you really start getting into making decisions like "let grannies die due to lack of trained nurses, or allow labor-based immigration", and few politicians are going to go with the first one (indeed, I believe that one of the reasons why right-wing populist parties are not particularly popular with the seniors in Europe is the fear that they might, indeed, be willing to let seniors die if it means less immigrants, even when they indicate otherwise).
Of course, Meloni would almost certainly like to address this at the source - ie. get those birth rates up, by hook or by crook - but even then it would take decades until the effect would be felt, and indeed the problem would even worsen in the short term (new moms out of the work force, health system would have to divert resources to infant and child issues etc.), meaning you'd have to depend on the immigrants during that time anyway.
More options
Context Copy link
The problem isn't parliaments but ECHR and the US.
1950s refugee conventions.
French recently ignored ECHR and deported a terrorist suspect to Uzbekistan, despite ECHR rulings saying you can't deport to countries like Uzbekistan, where secret police have boiled people to death iirc. Now the courts, as always lawful stupid, want that guy back..
https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20231212-council-of-state-orders-france-to-bring-back-man-deported-to-uzbekistan
More options
Context Copy link
Yes, the conservatives in the UK have an overwhelming majority in Parliament, which in theory gives them power to rewrite the entire immigration system. They don't.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link