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 the class system has changed since Disraeli’s day, there were peculiarities to the Victorian titles economy that even the Edwardians commented upon mockingly.
Part of the film’s subtext is about Fennell’s own ambiguity about her own class and its relationship to ideas of what it means to be middle class. There’s a funny interview where she says something like “I don’t see how the daughter of the ‘king of bling’ [her father’s tabloid-anointed nickname because of his jewelry business] could be really, really posh”. And of course posh people don’t ever really call themselves posh, they call themselves smart or chins or just ‘people like us’.
So there’s a lot of resentment in parts of the upper middle class, maybe lower gentry for people who unironically and unashamedly adopt the trappings of middle-middle class British life. People who actually say “pardon” instead of “what” and all the other u-and-non-u stuff. This then becomes the most embarrassing possible thing.
It’s not a coincidence that the decor of the villain’s comfortable middle class parents’ home is a florid pastiche of the Dursleys’ home in Harry Potter, played completely straight. In real life that’s not what the home of the class of people look like (certainly not in 2007, Rowling might get a pass because Harry Potter is set in the early ‘90s with some anachronisms like the millennium bridge), but in the film it’s a particular kind of gauche horror.
That, in practice, it was actually Lloyd George and Attlee who created the welfare state isn't surprising; it was always the bourgeois classes (both provincial and urban) who were most in tune with the need for something to stave off the radical left. That's probably a small part of the reason why they were successful at doing so in Germany and Britain but not in Russia, where there were fewer of them and they were less powerful.
More options
Context Copy link