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 -
A tweet I just saw:
Can any of you confirm or deny any of these claims?
It's easy to hit a record high when the last prior high was the day of the election. I believe though that Trump will make the world safer by acting as a deterrent by being perceived as less of a pushover compared to the Democrats. Trump introduces uncertainty into the diplomatic calculus. With Harris you know what you will get; less so with Trump.
More options
Context Copy link
NYC is ending their voucher program, although it's not clear that Trump has anything to do with it. https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4980386-new-york-city-ending-migrant-debit-card-program/
Previously, illegal migrants were given ~$1k a month ($350 a weeks) for groceries via prepaid debit cards while they were staying in hotels. It started in part because the free food vendor previously used by the city wasn't cutting it, so it was viewed as more cost efficient to switch to the cards.
More options
Context Copy link
I did look into some of those:
These are true.
This is true but highly misleading, they want Israel to surrender, basically.
This is unclear, Israel says they did, Qatar says they didn't.
This is true but they say it after every election.
Putin has not explicitly stated whether he will or will not sell oil in U.S. dollars. Due to the sanctions, Russia is actually unable to sell oil in U.S. dollars.
https://tass.com/economy/1869185
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
This implies that Putin's terms for ending the conflict/war goals have changed since Trump became president elect. In June this year Putin stated terms were Ukrainian recognition of Russia's annexation of the four oblasts and abandoning any plan of joining NATO and that still seems to be the case.
Trump: Your terms are acceptable.
If Biden were smart, he'd pre-empt Trump and take the exact same deal. He might even win a Nobel Peace Prize if he did.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
They've been saying that for ages, they have this holier-than-thou attitude where they go 'unlike the US, we think the world is big enough for America and China to be big powers - also stop making provocations in the South China Sea and encouraging separatism, you're stirring up trouble and spreading a Cold War mindset'.
The Chinese version of 'working peacefully with us' is just the same as the US version of 'being held accountable to the international community', it's a polite way of saying 'we are the good guys, we set the fundamental rules on what's acceptable, you can retain some sovereignty but not where it crosses our red lines'.
Not to dispute your point that nothing changed about what they are saying, but equivocating the two positions seems a bit off. Chinese "red lines" are drawn around the PRC itself, a bunch of reefs and one island next door; US "red lines" are conterminous with the PRC border on a good day, while on bad days they actually reach inside the country to also enclose HK, Xinjiang and/or Falun Gong.
True, on reflection there's a lot of flexibility with these things. The US used to only focus on the Americas as its sphere of uncontested influence - that changed into a global crusade.
China used to be principally concerned with mainland Asia and its immediate neighbours, acting in Korea, Vietnam and India. But even in the Maoist era they had a global foreign policy, propping up Albania against the USSR. Today they're still most interested in immediate neighbours but they do have global interests in resources, investments, infrastructure and so on. Australia is competing to out-influence China in the Solomon islands, well beyond the Nine Dash Line.
They're a big power and I think they have big ambitions. They're feeling the same seductive rush of power that saw America head out into the world all those years ago.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Putin has been ready to end the war since day 1 of the war, and likely before day 1 as well.
Having one side surrender is a definite way to end a war.
Hamas would be happy to end the war any day since about October 8, 2023.
It's very nice when you do what Hamas did on Oct 7, get a slap on the wrist and just walk away.
China would certainly want to stay at peace with the US while, for instance, invading Taiwan. There's nothing wrong with wanting to not be on the receiving end of a trade war, tariffs or sanctions.
Especially when you are doing something that should get you sanctioned.
The part missing in all of these is some kind of a trade in return, for instance China dropping all claims on Taiwan.
Trade wars only have receiving ends.
More options
Context Copy link
Has the United States ever made this request? It recognizes that Beijing is the sole legal government of China, and that Taiwan is part of China.
I believe the official position of both Taipei and Beijing is that there is but one China and that Taiwan is part of it. They disagree on which government is legitimate for it, though.
As such, I'm not surprised the US endorses this stance (although it does have some relations with Taiwan). I do hear that the vibe in Taiwan is shifting toward more acceptance of standalone independence, too.
More options
Context Copy link
The US? Probably not, the US has been quietly maintaining status quo amid open discussion of very much not peaceful actions in case China would actually attempt to enforce the sole legal government part.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
This point isn't accurate. It's based on anonymous US state department officials and has been denied by Qatar. Qatar has said that they think both parties are negotiating in bad faith and that they are no longer willing to be mediators for that kind of dialogue. What that actually means for Hamas' polticial office in Qatar is unclear, but it certainly isn't "Qatar is in awe of Trump so they're kicking Hamas out."
Alternately they're kicking 'em out now before the cheques start bouncing.
As another user pointed out down thread, one of the most effective things the first Trump administration did to stablize the Middle East was to cut US funding to Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, Et Al. Biden has since reinstated the old Clinton and Obama era policy of funding
radicalmoderate muslim fundementalist groups in the name of "outreach" but the Qataris aren't dumb, and presumably don't want to find themselves left holding the bag when Hamas' money runs out.Is the US funding Qatar in any real way ?
The US's biggest international military base is in Qatar. Qatar sells oil to everyone. If anything, the US doesn't buy much because it sources oil locally.
What leverage does the US have on Qatar ?
No, we're funding ISIS and the Iranians. I'm merely suggesting that the Quatri are smart enough to figure out which way the wind is blowing.
More options
Context Copy link
Yes I don’t know why the posts above don’t acknowledge that Qatar hosted Hamas, the Taliban etc with the explicit support and encouragement of the US.
Only because you didn't actually read the post did you?
We were supporting them but now we probably wont be.
At least not for the next four years.
Yes but the implication above was that the US merely tolerated or accepted the presence of these forces in Qatar, and that they were expelled out of fear this tolerance would not be extended. In truth, the US actively wanted them there for many years so that there was neutral ground for negotiation.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
These have made occasional suggestions of such nature for years now.
EU already buys a lot of US gas (19,4 % of all EU gas, according to this). https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/eu-gas-supply/
All world leaders of note will congratulate whatever US president gets elected and will try to communicate with him as a matter of course. Harris would haev been no different. The only notable thing is Elon's participation in the call.
More options
Context Copy link
The stock market and bitcoin are in fact at all-time highs. To be fair, they were already close to all-time highs before the election, but there was a large spike immediately after the election that can only be attributed to Trump. (The popular cope is that the markets were reacting to a decisive result, not nessesarily to Trump himself. This is cope.)
If this 'cope' isn't true, why did Biden get a similar boost in 2020?
Because he ran on a "return to normal"? I certainly don't think his (well Warren's) economic policy was priced in at that time. People weren't expecting the SEC to antagonize every sector of finance or for inflation to balloon to such levels.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I don't necessarily believe it's cope. A weak government (of either side) with no mandate is just less good than a clear victory (of either side).
Sure there's individual losers and winner (oil & gas especially), but I'd say there is a combination of a Trump bump specifically attributed to him with a bump for "someone has a mandate to govern decisively".
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
My gas bill went up 2.5x times in '23. US LNG is, at the very least, 3x more expensive intrinsically compared to piped gas. It's quite likely following the war, Nord Stream is going to be repaired (currently 3/4 pipes are broken) and put back into order.
Gas prices have already devastated German industry, we could just shutter everything and keep buying US energy, but I don't think that's likely. Not everyone's like me and considering leaving this place.
That's what you heard. What the Chinese meant is that they're not Khorne enthusiasts, they don't consider shedding blood the point of war and want to see US bow out of the contest over who gets to call the shots in East Asia peacefully.
Their plan is, build up the army and the army's navy to the point US is going to be facing insurmountable odds - overwhelmed with masses of precision weapons. According to simulations, US is almost always losing the war anyway because it has no good missile defense, not enough interceptors and all local bases are in range of Chinese missiles.
In addition, likely China can blockade Japan and Korea from, at least tankers, without ever leaving home. If Iran can make a few 100 ballistic missiles, Chinese can make thousands and thousands of accurate ones. US is making ~150 ABM interceptors a year. No contest.
So a protracted war would hurt everyone, not just Chinese, and ever more so, as China's moving to using more EVs and building up their domestic grid.
I expect by 2030 that the US stockpile of hypersonics will compare or exceed China's and the calculus will change considerably. The US machine moves more slowly but once it gains momentum it tends to get there.
Hypersonics are asymmetric. A hundred hypersonics flying toward CSG-7 have much more significant implications than a hundred flying to some missile battery in Shandong.
More options
Context Copy link
It was not the case back in the glory days of WW2. Today, it took Americans 15 years to solve oxygen issues in an oxygen generator for pilots.
The only possible case of this happening is if both are true a) US develops AI, and it's not a matter of compute but some special sauce (it has a proverbial moat). b) US manages to get around all the legal issues in expanding industry - endless wrangling over backyards, enviromental issues
If a) is not true, China will boost their manufacturing likewise. If b) is not true, US won't be able to expand its own manufacturing.
Also, unless AI at the level of hypersonic aviation researcher become available, China will have an edge population wise. Chinese aren't as imaginative but are less easily distracted - way more engineers. Furthermore, rivalry will drive out Chinese ethnic workers out of the US, quite likely.
It's other way around, every Chinese engineer with a 120 IQ is aiming to live comfortably in California rather than raise their kids in a totalitarian dystopia.
If anything, it further underlines how essential it is that we return California to a state of at least
half-decentquarter-decent government. Last week's moderate sweep in SF gives me a sliver of hope.Chinese engineers and scientists elect to live in the USA because you can make crazy amounts of money here. Style of government is rarely part of the decision function.
I know a lot of Chinese engineers and none of them are against the government, even though plenty have specific complaints here and there. Only one has taken up a hobby, hunting, that would be unavailable to him if he moved back.
Culturally they go along to get along but still most of their entertainment, food, and holidays are Chinese.
More options
Context Copy link
Used to be the case. Very much used to be the case. Not the case anymore. Lot of science talent has gone to China. Lot of white scientists have gone to China, where there's no DEI, and ideology in science is restricted to having students take a few hours monthly. They have no problem with insane school policies, homeless junkie schizos etc. China is cleaning up the air. Closing down old power plants, building up wind & solar in inner Mongolia, building new coal power plants with an eye to be converted to modular nuclear. They're currently in lead in nuclear reactor tech - having learned everything the West forgot, building up old & new types, more than the rest of the world combined. Cost of living is a lot lower in China, and wages are getting better.
Assuming you're american, China is extremely cheap, the RMB undervalued by 50%. You can go see for yourself. If you've got foreign SIM card, your internet isn't even gated behind the great firewall. With machine translation, you wouldn't even really be lost. Don't think they install shit on your phone unless you enter from one of the 'stans where they have an insurgent problem.
You could just go take a look. Or look around for someone who works there.
Guy here has a number of episodes interviewing whites who work or worked in China. https://www.manifold1.com/episodes
I've been more than a dozen times. Beneath the glossy exterior there's a society where everyone's fate is at the hands of a midwit apparatchik.
Moreover, the fate of your kids is dismal.
... who do you think caused European energy policy ?
Midwit unaccountable apparatchiks ruining entire continents is SOP. Germany's disastrous energy policy started when the fucking Greens got two secretaries or undersecretaries to the ministry of economy, iirc, cca 2000.
Try to show me Energiewende, based on wishful thinking, was sound policy. It wasn't. It was pie in the sky, cost must falls, we'll make it nonsense, that led to what everyone predicted. Sky high energy prices, burning more coal, spending megabucks on keeping standby plants running so you don't have brownouts.
Yet that doomed an entire continent. No one was ever asked.
I ask you again who in the US wanted infinity migration and 7% of population of Haiti moved in?
At least the CCP has somewhat sound priorities: having power and getting rich. Not turning China into Brazil with worse weather.
Oh, I totally agree on midwit policy makers.
I do think there is a funny kind of duality here -- in the west some moron can wreck your country but at least you can't personally be thrown in a dungeon for making fun of a politician on social media.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
This doesn't seem to track to me. Aren't a lot more Chinese students electing to go back to China rather than stay in the U.S. these days?
From my experience, many Chinese people really enjoy Chinese culture and want to live there over the US even though US wages are much better. Maybe 20 years ago things were different, but China is a lot nicer place to live in now.
Another thing to consider is that a single Chinese-born man living in the US has bleak dating prospects.
Sure, the supply of Chinese students graduating exceeds demand. But there are a couple million around LA man.
Plus, they can make beautiful wasian babies.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
We can't even produce enough shells for ukraine. It's explosive in a metal container, how hard could it be? And on the other end of the scale we can't produce enough ships, and also some of the ones we do produce are garbage, and we don't have enough sailors to properly man said ships. I don't see much reason to be more optimistic about the shiny new thing.
It could be worse. Here's what things are like in the Indian Navy.
But yeah, the idea that the US is capable of outproducing China is comical.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
They always called for the to the war. They offered to return hostages in exchange for IDF staying out of Gaza.
EU was sanctioning Russia since the Ukraine war, so probably nothing to do with Trump.
China has been saying that since the Nixon visit?
How is this even a thing? Why don't they simply return the hostages unilaterally?
Likudniks would still want to ethnically clense Gaza.
Gaza is already ethnically spotless.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Because that would defeat the purpose of having taken the hostages in the first place, of course this is also why the Isrealis have made the return of the hostages a prerequisite for any negotiation, so as to eliminate any incentive to take hostages in the future.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link