site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 13, 2025

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.

3
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It is my understanding that the British had other, more selective tools and the resources to use them.

To some extent. Most notably, we eventually managed to cut off the main source of their funding (American, unfortunately) which I think slowed them down considerably. The thing is, Israel was doing quite well at cutting off Hamas' backing before Oct 7. In fact, if I remember correctly, most of Israel's neighbours had made big steps toward official relations with them, mostly with the intent of opposing Iran. One of the most plausible reasons for Oct 7 was that Hamas needed to split the neighbouring muslim nations off Israel by provoking bloodshed.

We have regular muslim killings of white people in the UK: are we permitted to keep exterminating them until we are sure there are no Islamists left among them? The Chinese suffered terrorism too, I believe, does that render the Xinjiang internment camps justified?

If you have a community of 2nd-3rd generation immigrants and ethnocultural terrorism seems to have root in that community, it is your duty as a government to at the very least increase overwatch and law enforcement over that community. And if you can't or won't enforce the values and laws of the larger country over that diaspora so much that they might as well be a different state - then it's what is usually called "war".

That sounds like yes, especially since in practice anything short of Xinjiang levels of overwatch don't seem to work. I'm pretty nativist and I might abide by that if I had to but I wouldn't call it 'moral'.

Side with? Maybe not. But if they really can't destroy Israel, or secure sufficient independence from Israel (while Israel doesn't exactly have any reason to trust them with independence given the history), then I have all the less sympathy for them. If you want to do terrorism and martyrdom for independence, you'd better win and win fast.

This seems kind of like:

  • If someone steals your land and you accept it, you lose and they get to rule you forever.
  • If someone steals your land and you do everything you can to take it back but fail, you're pathetic and you deserve death.
  • If someone steals your land and you immediately kill lots of them and force them away, fair enough! Good on yer!

It's pragmatic, yes, but it seems a weird way to allocate sympathy. Certainly the West would probably be in much better shape now if we'd exterminated all our slaves and colonial subjects rather than merely repress them for a couple of centuries, but again I can't call that moral. Likewise, Israel did essentially steal much of the land and is therefore not starting with a firm moral foundation; you have the settlers, you have clear instances of extremely poor behaviour against both Muslims and Christians, and now you have them massacring Gazans. Two years ago I would have told you I was firmly in the Israeli camp! But frankly I can't condone what's being done, and I get increasingly creeped out as the pro-Israeli contigent (not pointing at you specifically) talk about how necessary all of this is and even sometimes say cheerfully that exterminating the Gazans man woman and child would be best for everyone.