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 -
All radical groups engage in deception, concealment, and false flags. The question is whether this is something specific to Islam. Which I maintain it is not, contrary to the people yammering about "Taqqiya" as if they have discovered Islam's deep dark secret. Yes, Muslims, like Christians and Jews, believe it's okay to lie to unbelievers who are persecuting them or to protect others. That's it, it's not a general practice of lying to unbelievers pretending you aren't planning to kill them.
And my reply to this is what I said above: I don't know if any Daesh clerics have issued some tortured interpretation of "Taqqiyah" to convince their agents to go deep cover as an infidel, but if so, I've never heard of it. And if the people I am complaining about were only claiming that jihadists are violent fanatics who twist their religion to justify terrorism, I would say "No shit Sherlock" right back at you. My point is that it's very common to see people claiming, essentially, that all Muslims (or ex-Muslims) are (or should be assumed to be) lying about their intentions. I saw this quite explicitly in a bunch of Twitter threads about Taleb al-Abdulmohsen. ("No such thing as an ex-Muslim," etc.) You proposed it as an explanation.
Maybe, though if there's evidence that he's actually a jihadist and the media is covering it up, that would be pretty dumb since we're already seeing years of his Twitter rantings being dug up.
I still think "woke right" is a pretty incoherent concept, but to the degree it exists, it think it fits exactly what I mean by "weird mix"; it's a stew of assorted resentments and grudges that don't neatly fit into a single coherent ideological category.
Christians are not allowed to lie to escape persecution under traditional interpretations of moral theology.
More options
Context Copy link
I didn't claim that false flags and deception were specific to Islam, only that they were tactics that radical Islam has been known to engage in and endorse.
One of the core tenets of Wahhabism (the subset of Islam from which pretty much all modern radical Sunni movements trace thier roots) is that anything is acceptable if it is done in the pursuit of god's enemies. Or to put it in more familiar/secular terms, there are no bad tactics only bad targets. Deash clerics don't need to make the argument explicitly because the argument is already implicit in the Deash worldview.
Is your argument really that the media and assorted twitter personalities couldn't possibly be decieved and would never just lie to our faces? Because if so i have a bridge in London to sell you.
And again, i disagree because it seems pretty coherent to me.
As i have argued in prior discussions there seems to be a distinct subset of the extremely-online "right" that is far more "woke" and identitarian than they are right-wing. One of the unifying themes of this subset is a seething resentment of Christians/Normies/Anyone who isn't as black-pilled miserable or cynical as they are.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link