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 -
How can Texas physically prevent the border patrol from entering Texas? Texas doesn't have border control between it and other states, and wouldn't part of the border patrol already be in Texas anyway?
See the link I posted right above your comment; Texas seized a park that they're excluding the border patrol from access to.
How are they excluding the border patrol from it? What happens when Biden says "go in anyway"?
I suspect there would be no practical way to actually stop border patrol without the use of force, and once you cross that line you're in "I may have committed some light treason" territory.
From a legal perspective, Shelby Park is owned by Texas or the town of Eagle's Pass. From a practical sense, they put up fences and parked some state humvees on state or town-owned roads.
I expect the answer is Biden says go in anyway is that Texas flinches and adds trespassing to their lawsuit, but I wouldn't want to bet a whole lot of money on that, or how it would go if it happens.
That's an interesting question: How would this play out if the land in question were private? Can I hang a "no federal agents allowed without a warrant" sign by my door? Even if I had a business open to the general public? Can the state apply such a sign to state land? I don't see a compelling reason why they couldn't. Is there a warrant in this case? Or an existing easement?
If nothing else, there's at least a fair amount of jurisprudence, ironically in the name of "sanctuary cities", that suggests that the Feds cannot compel the state to work with them. Which is, at least, an entertaining academic argument. Although I'm admittedly not particularly aware of the specifics in this case.
No, within such and such distance of the border the CBP doesn't need a warrant to enter private property.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Importantly here the BP agents are already in Texas, and are largely Texans who wish that Biden would let them do a better job of stopping the illegal crossings; ie. they mostly support Abbot's side of things.
So it seems unlikely that there will be any sort of direct confrontation between the BP and Texas authorities -- if Biden decides to send somebody more loyal in to cut the razor wire things do get more interesting.
Not only that, Biden has derided them over manufactured outrage. There was a still shot of a mounted CBP agent in the river with people crossing the border, with the agent spinning his reins to control his horse. The media promulgated this as "border patrol agent whips migrants." Biden personally said that the agents involved "will pay" for their actions: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/24/us/politics/biden-border-patrol-haitian-migrants.html
So they're really not enthused about not doing the job they signed up for, to help a President that wants them to pay for things they never did.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link