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 -
It's more like the size of the various dynasties ebbed and flowed. They at various had control of north Korea and Vietnam, and of course the Yuan dynasty was essentially the continuation of Genghis Khan and could make a claim for much of Asia.
If you look at recent history China seems pretty non-expansionist, with Tibet the only exception. They famously turned away from the opportunities of colonialism at the peak of China's power
Another similarity between China and the Roman Empire is Terminus, the god of boundaries.
Ancient Romans believed that territory, once captured, should never be surrendered.
China seems to believe mostly the same thing. All they want is all the territory they've ever had. That's how they have gradually expanded to their current size (although still slightly less than the Qing dynasty peak). The recapture of Tibet is the largest acquisition of territory by any country since the end of WWII.
Even now, China is busy colonizing and Han-ifying its own country. I think they are very expansionist, but just move very slowly.
More options
Context Copy link
Tibet's capture can directly be traced to brain-dead actions by India.
Tibet's hostile terrain makes it difficult to capture, and even harder to hold on to. It's a on-your-feet infantry operation. No air force, no navy, no tanks and limited use of vehicles. It's rural Afghanistan on steroids. It's Hitler marching into Russia. Tibet is invadable for 3 months of the year. India could've helped Tibet stay independent with limited assistance. Nehru is fully to blame for this, as he is for a lot of boneheaded decisions through his tenure.
It would've given India a buffer state the size of the 10th biggest country in the world. No embarrassment of 1962. No worries of a 2 front war between Pakistan & China. No direct land route between China and Pakistan. Easier to keep Kashmir stable. Direct access to Central Asia.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link