site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 26, 2024

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.

6
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

From my position as a moderately liberal griller this sounds like exactly what the right did after Trump lost: whining about stolen elections, utterly and embarrassingly paralyzing Congress, leading half the country into a fact-free conspiracy fantasy land, and so on.

Wow, sounds rough. It sure puts things into perspective. I now feel silly for complaining about riots resulting from a drug addict dying in police custody, which caused a massive spike in crime across America, an international rape hysteria that resulted in any form of benefit of doubt being thrown out in the court of public opinion, possibly the biggest medical scandal in recent history seeing thousands of children undergo irreversible hormonal and surgical interventions, the philosophical view that caused it becoming so enmeshed that teachers in many western countries help to facilitate the process while keeping it secret from the kid's parents, and law enforcement hardly think twice about sending rapists to female prisons, and having to talk about all that on a self-hosted forum, because that's the way you co discuss these topics without the fear of getting banned, and having to do so anonymously for fear of losing my job.

I should worry more about real things like my political outgroup "whining", paralyzing congress, believing in conspiracy theories, and other things that haven't been claimed by every group about it's political opposition in every democratic country, ever.

What’s going on in the movie you’re watching?

Indeed. Can you give me an example of an extremist democratic president, you'd understand people complaining about? And a few example of far-left cultural elements coming to heel?

Essentially zero of this is a product of Biden being elected. You picked Floyd, which was during Trump's term, and a bunch of things that are generally not action by the federal government.

Like, there's plenty to complain about Biden for (e.g. student loans!), but stick to what he's actually done? Or explicitly say that the problem is the missed opportunities for the right to crack down on these things, in which case the problem is not so much that the democrats are (mostly) in power, but that the republicans aren't?

Essentially zero of this is a produce of Biden being elected. You picked Floyd, which was during Trump's term, and a bunch of things that are generally not action by the federal government.

Yes, I know. He was talking about how red tribers reacted to Biden getting elected, so I compared it to blue tribe's reaction to Trump getting elected.

In hindsight, I'll admit the trans stuff is a stretch, and probably would have happened regardless

Trump was president in 2020.

So it’s strange you bring up the Floyd situation in response to that comment talking about complaints after Trump left office.

Tomato was talking how red tribe reacted to Trump leaving office, so I compared it to how blue tribe reacted to Trump entering office. What's strange about that?

Riots in 2020 were not reacting to Trump entering office.

So your sense of chronology seems a bit off.

I completely agree that things would have (almost certainly) gotten less out of hand if Hillary (or any Dem) had been president.

Not sure how that should influence your vote.

Riots in 2020 were not reacting to Trump entering office.

I completely agree that things would have (almost certainly) gotten less out of hand if Hillary (or any Dem) had been president.

Now you're just being pedantic.

Not sure how that should influence your vote.

Vote for who your brain / heart tells you to, I was just addressing the claim which tribe's reaction was worse.

It’s remarkable you think it’s “pedantic” to point out you aren’t responding with apples to apples in your comparison based on chronology alone, even without the whole issue that the 2020 riots did not have anything explicit to do with Trump, since it’s not the federal government that controls the police.

You can still believe the Blue tribe is bad. I’m not trying to convince you it’s not. I don’t like them either and I certainly think the 2020 riots were atrocious and excused by many progressives, along with the “defund the police” insanity.

But do try to criticize your outgroup accurately when you do it. The Motte is best when we can at least be consistent and precise even when we’re not charitable.

It’s remarkable you think it’s “pedantic” to point out you aren’t responding with apples to apples in your comparison based on chronology alone,

Why? Yes, I shouldn't have used the word entering, because that allowed you to restrict the analysis to the period when his term only started. That's what pedantic means.

even without the whole issue that the 2020 riots did not have anything explicit to do with Trump, since it’s not the federal government that controls the police.

That's only relevant if you take the BLM movement at face value, and believe they were actually concerned with the police's conduct, or "black lives" for that matter.

Isn’t the reason you used the term the fact that was what Tomato was referring to, specifically the Right’s reaction to losing the election?

BLM can dislike both the police and Trump but they only rioted after a police shooting that had nothing to do with the Feds or Trump.

You’re just doing lazy “boo group” analysis and now trying to backtrack on how it is somehow actually relevant as a response to Tomato’s point. The left is bad enough without you having to be imprecise about it.

Isn’t the reason you used the term the fact that was what Tomato was referring to, specifically the Right’s reaction to losing the election?

No, because I don't think a reaction has to come immediately after an event.

BLM can dislike both the police and Trump but they only rioted after a police shooting that had nothing to do with the Feds or Trump.

Sometimes you need an excuse to do something you wanted to.

You’re just doing lazy “boo group” analysis and now trying to backtrack on how it is somehow actually relevant as a response to Tomato’s point. The left is bad enough without you having to be imprecise about it.

You should get better at psychologizing, if you want to insist on doing it.

I suspect there's literally no way I can phrase this that the mods will approve of, but I think it's actually an important point to make so I will say it plainly:

This comment is a pitch-perfect example of the type rightist whining we've been putting up with for years. I can assure you it is indeed very annoying.

  • -15

You’re correct: dismissing your opponents’ fears as whining is petty and counterproductive. If there’s any value left in the Motte, if there’s one reason to hang around here, it’s to actually engage with stuff you think is obviously wrong. Take that away, and you might as well flounce off.

I’m not modding you for responding in kind to a thread of people making the exact same dismissal. I do like it a lot better when you resist the urge.

Right, but this whole post is about how annoying it will be for OP to have to leftists whining for four years if Trump wins.

Which sides whine about what and how annoying it is, is the object-level purpose of this conversation thread.

In other situations I wouldn't have brought this up, and indeed have never to my knowledge done so despite engaging with these types of sentiments dozens or hundreds of times.

You didn't answer his question.

And you didn't respond to the substance of my comment.

Sometimes we have a point to make that's not a direct reply. That's totally fine, and it's weird to me that you seem to criticize it at the exact same time you're also doing it?

Oh never mind, I'm getting confused and thought you were the parent commenter. Apologies.

Ah, if it was a misunderstanding then my critique is off-base, and apologies back.

It wasn’t actually directed at him.

Which, yeah, raises the question of why respond at all. I certainly wouldn’t mind seeing his answer or Tomato’s.