site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 18, 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.

5
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

To what extent does whether or not the deal was good for the US depend on political positioning

The fullest extent possible.

A person's support for JCPOA depends on how they reason about America's unipolar superpower status. Ie. Is Pax Americana enforced primarily by carrot or stick ?

Stick Believer:

  • America became an economic behemoth through incomparable labor productivity.
  • Its commensurate military spend keeps every nation scared. So no sane country dares stir up the hornets nest.
  • Any country insane enough to believe otherwise faces the full might of American economic sanctions and military intervention.
  • The US beats these enemies down into submission, until they pick a subservient leader that bends the knee.
  • The US doesn't need anyone. As long as every other country is isolationist too, the US will win in a straight battle of brain or brawn.

Carrot Believer:

  • America was best positioned to leap-frog every nation post-WW2. It made good decisions, and ended up far ahead of everyone else
  • America maintains a moderate lead, but the conditions aren't as favorable as post-WW2
  • The free-market capitalist world created by the US is the most benevolent arrangement offered by any global superpower.
  • Join us and you will flourish. Hell, America may give you a little push to bring you up to speed.
  • America is confident in its own labor productivity. Pair that with consistent import of top talent & reserve currency status. The 3 will keep US rich forever.

Ideally, the carrot and the stick work together. But, they've increasingly divorced themselves from the other.

JCPOA was a carrot solution for a country that hadn't given into the stick since the 1990s. By 2016, the US had tried the stick with the whole middle east. Initial successes turned into embarrassing failures as these forever wars dragged on. At face value, JCPOA sounds like a good idea. But, the aforementioned divorce meant that America implements both the carrot and stick with a degree of naive optimism.


was it bad enough that withdrawing from it was a net positive for the US?

Yes, withdrawing was the correct solution.

Naive pro-stick optimism leads to forever wars, a drain on the economy, thorough destruction of the victim and development of perpetual hatred towards America. It's squalor but never a threat. On the other hand, Naive pro-carrot optimism is exploited by bad actors to turn themselves into credible threats towards the US. Pakistan exploited America's (and IMF's) naivety for decades, only to become the home for every one of America's most wanted. Obama was smart enough to withdraw support for Pakistan in his time, but chose wrong on Iran.

Now here's the thing. Iranians are scary smart. Iran is a civilizational state with real history. Its diplomats are among the world's best wordcels socialized to western-elite culture. This coaxes democrats into a false sense of security. Surely, these people (white & cultured) can be brought into Pax America without much friction.

Dead wrong ! The clergy hold a strong grip on Iran's power structures. Leadership of the global shia-aligned militia & (credible threat to) Israel are fundamental to maintaining that control. Against an increasingly militarized Israel, having nuclear weapons would've been an essential component of the clergy's politics.

Also, unlike Pakistan or Myanmar, Iran isn't a failed state. The lives of citizens aren't bad enough to trigger internal revolution or military coups. This means that a stick wasn't yet a 'last nail in the coffin'. On the other hand, unlike North Korea or Venezuela, this is a well-fed civilized society. So, if culture itself shifts then a peaceful transfer of power is a possible outcome. What does opening up to the US get you ? Liberalization and further power transfer to Tehran liberals ? Why would the clergy want that ?

The stick (withdrawing JCPOA and replacing it with crippling sanctions) was the right solution. You do not negotiate with a natural adversary. Especially when they're better talkers (liars) than you.

Post-2016, a bunch of (unforeseen?) geopolitical changes have vindicated the pro-stick faction. In 2016, Iran looked like a stable and non-radical middle-eastern Muslim nation. The rest of the middle east was rubble, mid-arab-spring or chain sawing journalists for sport. Yeah they hated Israel, but who in the middle east didn't. If anything, the shias were moderate.

Since then, 3 big changes happened:

  • Saudi Arabia's radical liberal shift has given the US the stable liberalization Islamic (not Islamist) nation it was looking for. So, Iran matters less.
  • Sunni Govt. hostility towards the West & Israel died down (Egypt, Saudi, Turkey), and Shia hostility picked up. The clergy are now further shoehorned into anti anti-America, anti-Israel position. There is no way Iran could've honestly engaged with JCPOA.
  • Post Oct 8th, Israel thoroughly dismantled Iran's Shia militia network. For Iran today, there isn't much global Shia leadership left to perform. This further weakens the Clergy's hold. It won't break the camel's back just yet. But, Khomeini could drop dead any day now, and that might just do it.

JCPOA withdrawl would have been a slam dunk, but geopolitical changes outside the middle east ruined it.

IMO, all American international policy should be structured towards counter balancing China. America has utterly failed here. The whiplash between Trump & Biden has given China space to plant its flag as an equal alternative to the US rather than a #2.

Trump alienated Europe, driving it away from the US. Then Biden kicked Russia out of all global markets. America's allies supposedly change based on who is elected. America's international policy uncertainty has allowed China to start filling in where the US has appeared flaky.

The Iran-Russia-China nexus has materialized outside America's sanctionable world. Europe, India and Africa have settled into neutral/opportunist policies instead of strongly aligning themselves to a temperamental USA. This means Chinese products (electronics, cars, software) are now competing directly with western offerings. Guess what, China's winning.

The US is still substantially ahead at #1, but their lead is fast crumbling. For now, USD as reserve currency is safe, as China failed to make Yuan happen. China's population bomb is about to explode and they fumbled their leading position in AI due to intense anti-Taiwan antagonism. See how these are all Chinese mistakes, not US wins.

That's the big question. How long can the USA keep banking on their enemies making unforced errors ?