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 -
I viewed the entire document she put together as compelling - I can repost the entire thing here if you want, but why? If I just copy and paste the arguments I like piecemeal, there's way too much room for forgotten citations or other misunderstandings. There's an immense number of citations and I don't really see what would be gained by reposting the whole thing here with worse formatting.
You missed the other half of that point. You can't use casualty numbers to determine whether or not a genocide is taking place, because by the time you can accurately identify a genocide via casualty numbers those people are already dead and there's nothing you can do. That's why people rely on other signs that a genocide is taking place or is otherwise imminent, because if your goal is to prevent genocides from taking place you have to be able to show that one is in progress or about to start, rather than just showing up after the victims are all dead, saying "Well, now that we have the numbers I guess this was actually a genocide." and shrugging your shoulders.
Yes, it isn't an argument - it is just restating my position because the actual argument was already linked in pdf form above.
Mask? Assuming that you're accusing me of being an antisemite who is disguising my hatred for jews as a more generic opposition to crimes against humanity and genocide, I have to disagree. I'm a (very unconventional) leftist and I think that what Israel is doing is morally and ethically wrong, and this is a direct consequence of left wing political values. I've broken bread with jews and gotten along with them just fine at the protest marches against the genocide, so at the very least I can say that my own personal experience is not that of an anti-semite. If you think that all criticism of Israel is anti-semitic, then I fall into that category (and I'm in good company to boot).
The Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People. I have been repeatedly told by Israelis that a single state solution is unviable because it would loses its Jewish character, and that seems to be backed up by the laws passed and enforced by Israel. If it isn't intent on ethnic purity, there should be no barrier to a single state solution with full-franchise for everyone, including non-jewish Palestinians.
More options
Context Copy link