site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   28295 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 23, 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
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I admit I put my foot in it re: Afghanistan but I don't think Lebanon is a slam dunk. We're talking about ethnic differences here, so we have to look beyond "well Israel is 75% Jewish so it's homogenous". Those Jews come from all kinds of places with all kinds of ethnic backgrounds.

So, first off, I don’t believe I have ever heard a single person describe Israel as homogenous. Any country where a full one in four of its citizens is from an ethnolinguistically and religiously different group from the other three is, by definition, not homogenous.

And yes, you note that even within the Jewish Israeli population there are significant divisions. That’s also true, and also a source of political and cultural tension within Israeli society! My understanding is that the tensions between the Ashkenazi founding stock and the later waves of Sephardic and especially Mizrahi Jews produced massive friction in Israel for the first decades of its existence. Israel is also still to this day having major issues with the differences between its Ultra-Orthodox/Haredi population versus the other strains of Judaism.

So yes, you have correctly noticed that Israel is not in fact a homogeneous country.

So yes, you have correctly noticed that Israel is not in fact a homogeneous country.

Cool, sounds like we agree that at best the homogeneity /happiness relationship is not entirely straightforward.

Israel has been engaged in a decades-long violent campaign, with periodic mass-casualty events on both sides, against a hostile ethnic group within its own borders. This is your example of a happy country?

Weirdly enough, I recall reading an article that basically said exactly that; a Jew found he was much happier living in Israel than he was in America, despite the issues you outlined.

He basically concluded that it was a mix of close proximity, similar culture, and a sort of espirit de corp - a type of shared experience leading toward tighter and closer bonds.

I wish I could remember the name of the article, though. I hate how my brain works, sometimes.

You have actually seen the post we are discussing, correct?

Ha! I fully admit that I had not seen the post; I originally replied to your comment from the new comments thread, rather than seeing it under the parent post.

So, yes, I agree that @Highlandclearances’s comment claiming a link between national happiness and homogeneity looks very odd considering the post to which he was replying, especially considering that even besides Israel, another country in the top 5 (Serbia) has its own internal ethnic divisions, including an ethnically-separate breakaway region it refuses to recognize as a sovereign nation. Hell, even the #1 entry, Lithuania, has a substantial ethnic Russian minority.

So yes, I would agree with you that the link between homogeneity and happiness is not as straightforward as might be assumed. However, I would also be very interested in the methodology of the report under discussion. In the case of Israel, for example, I’d be curious to know how representative their sample was. (Were the Palestinians included?) I’d also want to see where Israel has ranked on that same report in previous years. (I’m indisposed right now or I would look into it myself before commenting.) That being said, my argument does look a bit comical when juxtaposed with the post that it’s under. It could just be that Israel is an extreme outlier and that the general link between ethnic homogeneity and happiness is generally true and observable.

I’d be curious to know how representative their sample was. (Were the Palestinians included?)

Usually no, since they're not Israelis.

I’d also want to see where Israel has ranked on that same report in previous years.

Israel places high in all those various happiness surveys, top 10 is common.

Israel has been engaged in a decades-long violent campaign, with periodic mass-casualty events on both sides, against a hostile ethnic group within its own borders.

I actually think that's part of it. Americans and Europeans seem to be obsessing over unsolvable low-stakes nonsense, or making new problems up, or generally complaining about richest-country-in-the-world problems (maybe besides immigration, which is a huge deal your politicians don't seem to be taking seriously enough). Having a war once in a while, and especially one where the population is confident in winning, helps keep things in perspective.

Any country where a full one in four of its citizens is from an ethnolinguistically and religiously different group from the other three is, by definition, not homogenous.

Jews and Arabs are very self-segregated though. Each community lives in their own towns, have their own educational systems, their own religious institutions and even get to apply different religious rules on their own communities. Same goes for the smaller minority groups like Druze or Circassian.

Intra-Jewish political friction does exist, but [EDIT] it doesn't manifest itself in actual IRL day-to-day hostility. [/EDIT]

I wonder how much of Israeli happiness is just that it's a young country? Old people are bitter and cantankerous and it's a self-reinforcing cycle. Having lots of youngsters around breaks that up a bit.

Possibly, but that poll specifically is among young people anyway. I also think there’s a chicken-and-egg scenario here where happy, and more importantly optimistic, people will have more children which makes society look happier and more optimistic (and more cute!).

Having a unifying overculture is extremely helpful in forming common identity. Every Israeli is 3 opinions sharing a bipolar body, but one of those opinions is 'our neighbors want to kill us'. It is a remarkably clarifying point that can unify literally every Israeli, from an Israeli Arab Muslim to the gayest Tel Aviv homo.

Except for the Haredi. Were it not for the Arabs, the Haredi might be a sufficient spoiler to break Israel entirely.

Anyways, with a common overculture it is easy to reach a fairly baseline happiness, even in the face of adversity. If the source of unhappiness is a local element within your nation, happiness indices will likely fail. The Arabs all hate the Israelis, but they hate the Shia/Sunni/Deobandi/Kurd/Turk/Khaleeji/Phoenician/Saudi/Azamigh next to them juuuuust a little bit more.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats