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 -
But the Japanese did not start of attacking Pearl Harbor, they started off invading China 2 years before war kicked off in Europe; and they surely had an advantage in technology, organisation and training over the Chinese at the time. (The Chinese were an utter mess at this point.) The Japanese were shocked by the Chinese resistance after the initial advances, e.g. in Shanghai, because they expected Japan to steamroll over China in less than a year because they were Obviously Better, as evidenced in their surprise victory decades before in the First Sino-Japanese War (edit: and the Russo-Japanese war, and the occupation of Manchuria, etc, etc.)
The reason the US got roped into the war was in large part due to the US embargoing oil to Japan (in retaliation of Japanese activities in colonial southeast Asia, including actions made to secure resources for the mainland campaign and to cut off aid to China). If their technological and cultural advantage over the Chinese was sufficient to overpower China (the “substantial advantage in technology and training”), the US may not have been involved in the war after all, or at the very least, the timeline would be drastically different.
It isn’t much of an argument for HBD in any case. The Japanese military was delusional, campaigning to conquer a country at least an order of magnitude larger was always going to be a Herculean task, any technological advantages aside, and it wasn’t like China was working with sticks and stones. One would have to also ignore how the Chinese led the Japanese in social organisation and technology for history up until the Meiji restoration and conclude that actually, all of that was just luck, and only 1860s and after really counts.
The Quing conquered China, and Manchuria looks to only be ~2x the size of Japan at the beginning of their conquest
The Qing also helpfully had much of the Ming military defect to them (Wu Sangui opening Shanhai Pass being the most famous, but many of the most capable officers had already defected as early as 1620-1630) as the Ming collapsed and the Shun was ransacking Beijing. Most of the military used by the Qing to defeat the Ming (and the generals formulating strategy) were ethnic Han, not to mention specialised troops like artillerists that the Jurchens didn’t have institutions for. Even then it took some 30 odd years from the unification of the Jurchens and conquest of Manchuria to the subjugation of the entire Chinese mainland, excepting remnants and Taiwan. (The Three Feudatories revolt shortly after was also an existential crisis for the Qing.)
It’s not really comparable.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link