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 -
If the latest news from the past few minutes is accurate, the driver indeed turns out to have a Muslim-sounding name, and online Noticers were correct in identifying the wrapped up flag as an ISIS one:
There’s also at least one photo of the man lying dead in the street, and he does appear brown (or black American convert, as some commenters claim?) and bearded.
Right on cue is a Reddit comment to the tune of “that’s what upsets me most about an Islamic truck-ramming, backlash against peaceful Muslims”:
Roughly +15 net upvotes. A pesky wrongthinker asks:
Someone else replies:
I’m not sure I can figuratively roll my eyes any harder.
And, of course, lots of seething about Trump, Vance, racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, MAGA, Fox News, etc. in that thread.
To quote myself:
More options
Context Copy link
Rather amazing that after supporting jihadism since 2003 the US hasn't been hit harder than it has. The US meddling in Syria and the war in Iraq are directly to blame for ISIS, especially combined with operation timber sycamore with the US arming jihadists.
These terrorist attacks have nothing to do with middle eastern conflicts, although I know leftists are desperate to draw connections between the two in order to say Americans deserve it somehow
Seriously, how does some guy driving a car into a crowd end up being connected to some resistance groups being given guns? If anything the jihadists would be grateful to America, if they weren’t under the influence of a monomaniacal death cult
ISIS wins in Syria and that inspires Jihadists in the west. Just like in Syria unlike under Assad, secular education that respected Christians is replaced by Islamic education, likeminded people become more brazen in the west as well.
There is a connection with helping destroy Christian people in middle east and helping inspire the same fanatics to harm Christian people outside the middle east.
There is also a connection between inviting these kind of people in your country as legal migrants. This terrorist was even an educated person IIIRC.
You are treating the victims of terrorist attacks who certainly don't deserve it and the immoral American foreign policy establishment who isn't the one dying, as being on the same boat here. If the foreign policy establishment is to blame the American victims are also their victims. This establishment could deserve to be blamed while the victims definetly don't "deserve it"
Regarding blame.
Of course there is a relation between populace in general and governance to a degree but to be fair it isn't as if the average American has that effective control over whether America funds jihadists or not. The American establishment kind of does as it wants. In certain periods the American public was willing to support regime change in Iraq, and so they aren't blameless for the consequences of regime change in Iraq but for the most part the American elites do as they please without the average American deciding about putting troops in Syria, training Jihadists, or not.
Or take the Pakistani rape scandal in Britain. The British establishment and parts of population have a responsibility there for allowing this, and their logic of "antiracism" leads to monstrous abuses. But this is different than blaming the victims. Rather the society has harmed part of its own people by allowing monstrous foreign child rapists gangs.
If you help a wild dog and he ends up killing people who you are responsible for, you kind of have your own responsibility. The American (foreign policy establishment) love affair with Jihadists including Osama Bin Laden in the 1980s, in the Yugoslav wars in the 1990s, and of course in the Syrian war has its consequences. If Jihadists are ungrateful immoral fanatics, then you are doing something very wrong if you support them. To allow them to ruin other countries because you are in favor of them weakening those countries it is pretty awful on its own right too. But blowback is another consequence of this.
More options
Context Copy link
There have been almost no Islamic terrorist attacks in the United States since 2017 compared to the 20 years before that. It could be a coincidence that we get the biggest one in 10 years immediately after Assad's Syria falls, but I have suspicions.
More options
Context Copy link
I mean, the jihadists(or at least their western followers) are clearly batshit crazy, so maybe stop trying to ascribe logical and rational motives.
Islamism is internally consistent, not crazy, it's just evil.
Western blacks who convert to Islam in prison (not sure if this is the case here, but it seems quite likely) generally didn't pick up the internally consistent version of Islam. Batshit crazy is a better model than smart-evil or intellectually-coherent-but-wrong for that group.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
IIRC their hostility to America started with an Egyptian named Qutb who came to America on scholarship, and basically was an incel who hated that Americans dated and danced and listened to jazz music.
All of these things are arguably or not so arguably literally condemned by Islam, though.
And thus he could have simply concluded that Muslims shouldn’t be in the West and banned his followers from using Western media or visiting the west. I mean a lot of the Woke stuff is anti-Christian as well, and most serious Christians avoid exposure to that kind of media and so on. They don’t drive through crowds.
Christianity also gets pissed on and blasphemed in its home countries a million times a day in media and culture, nobly turning the other cheek year after year as it shrinks. I'm not religious myself, I'm just saying it's not totally inscrutable why a fanatical Muslim might not consider it an example to emulate.
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
How would fighting multiple wars in the middle east not be connected to blow back? Having large well organized and well equipped jihadist groups can very well cause terrorism in other countries. 9/11 wouldn't have happened without the CIA-asset Bin Ladin, multiple attacks in Europe have been conducted by people trained in the middle east. The ideological inspiration, propaganda and connections between jihadists in the middle east and the west do exist. Terrorism increased markedly in Europe during ISIS hay day in Syria.
The neo-con project, mass immigration and terrorism are intertwined.
There is quite literally a direct line of causality between deBaathification in Iraq and ISIS. Purging the Iraqi military and public service resulted in thousands of professional soldiers and officers as well as otherwise peaceful professionals like graphic designers, accountants, intelligence analysts, etc being unemployable overnight and so they joined up with fledgling ISIS and that's how it became such a competent organization so fast. This was even predicted by US analysts and foreign policy writers at the time, but Rumsfeld et al proceeded any way and only rescinded after most of the damage was done.
So "otherwise peaceful" but now unemployable Baathist graphic designers, accountants and intelligence analysts just naturally sign up with ISIS because, well, what else would they do?
Shouldn't we be thinking of people like this in similar terms as we might view southern Confederate sympathizers during and after the American Civil War?
Why don't you try to consider it from their perspective? Almost overnight, their careers are ended and are made unable to support themselves and their families and their own government and fellow people subjected to tremendous violence and destabilization more or less for no good reason. Why wouldn't that radicalize a person?
This was both the anticipated and actual outcome of deBaathification.
You mean we should have extended them a blanket pardon conditional on an oath of loyalty? Yes, I think that would have been the ideal outcome and may have stopped Iraq from sliding toward Iran puppet-state status by having continuity and more robustness in its institutions.
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
Of course redditors would immediately understand the problem with this if after Dylan Roof’s shooting you had said “Damn. My heart to all White men today who will bear the racist fall-out of this mad man’s evil move” Most people just lack any self awareness or non-object level reasoning ability.
Edit: I know this is a lame boomerism “Imagine if the situations were reversed” but I can’t help it
"Another mass shooting, law-abiding gun owners hardest hit" is something that you do kind of hear in the right spaces, and is also pretty true...
Earnestly, it'd be nice to see the US improve vehicle-pedestrian safety standards more like those of Europe.
More tongue-in-cheek: we need to ban assault cars! Anything with a higher top speed than 85mph (fastest posted speed limit in the US), better zero-to-60 speed than a Honda Civic (7.5 seconds), or dangerous cosmetic features (spoilers, racing stripes, red paint). Or anything over 3000 pounds. Whoops, most vehicles fit at least one of those.
More options
Context Copy link
“Ban cars” or the like is indeed a common in-joke among crimethink corners of interweb whenever some Truck of Peace makes incidental contact with pedestrians.
For much of today, the top thread (other than stickied ones) on the New Orleans subreddit was calling for cars to be banned from the French Quarter.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
To the extent it's lame, it's only lame because progressives insist it's lame, nor do they have a counter for it beyond "it isn't the same... because it just isn't, okay?!" and just-so explanations. A related example would be "one joke."
Even for chronic Problematic wrong-thinkers like me who are well-initiated and relatively inured to this stuff, it can be jarring to see what sentences look like when they get "find and replace"'d for Who? and/or Whom?
Here's another one:
If the Dylann Roof incident had happened recently, without prompting it wouldn't occur to me to make Norm-pilled jokes along the lines of:
Yet people say this kind of feel-good, hugboxxy shit in earnest. Reality defeats parody.
A major problem with this madlib is that the second one about being nice to "white neighbors" is somewhat nonsensical because it is now unclear who exactly "people" are. In the one about Muslims, "people" is clearly everyone non-Muslim (probably mostly presumed to be white); but in the one about whites, it is exactly these whites who are the main target audience, i.e., normal "people". A better madlib might be regarding Republicans in the aftermath of the Charlottesville riots or police officers in the aftermath of some shooting controversy. For me, it is ultimately glib rather than pithy.
As I wrote, the second one would be a joke, but even if playing both statements straight I find your quibbling to be unconvincing.
Sounds like an isolated demand for gerrymandering. Why not "people" being everyone, or at least "people" being presumably white Americans as in your non-Muslim specification? I suppose it may indeed be too tall an ask for black or latino Americans to be "nice" to white Americans when it comes to crime, rhetoric, etiquette, net-tax transfers.
There are tons of self-hating white Americans who simp for non-Asian minorities, or at least those who exhibit racial out-group preferences.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I have felt a bit "yeah yeah, same old hypocrisy as always" when encountering one of these situations in the past, but a) I agree that the complete neutering of it as a meme feels astroturfed, in the sense that I question the loyalties of those who are most vocally opposed to it and b) I have come to the conclusion that if I have to notice this shit, so does everyone else.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The reason "imagine if the situations were reversed" is lame is that it's impotent, not that it's wrong.
A dose of reality is never "impotent".
More options
Context Copy link
No, it’s useful to occasionally shake one back into objectivity and away from the prevailing frame.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
There is a Youtube channel under that name and he does seem to be a black American convert, rather than an immigrant.
Thanks; found it. It’s a beehive of activity in the comments section of his one video.
Top comment:
🤣
Other amusing comments:
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link