site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 20, 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.

5
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I think that the incentives of the cartels are pretty unlike the incentives of jihadist Palestinians.

In particular, provoking the opposed government into a violent response is good strategy for jihadists, but a terrible strategy for the cartels.

When the cartels start firing rockets over the US border, you have my blessings to bomb their launch sites (if Mexico is unable or unwilling to put a stop to that).

When forces of the Mexico government overcome your border defenses and start massacring your citizens, you have my blessings to turn Mexico into Gaza in a futile attempt to enforce a regime change.

Neither provocation will happen. The cartels like the status quo, especially the part where they are not getting bombed. The US government (presumably) likes the part where they are not criticized for accepting tremendous civilian casualties in their military operations (for a change). This is one of the cases where military confrontation would make things worse for both sides.

I mean, if you want to task the CIA with taking out cartel bosses without killing innocent bystanders (think snipers, not hellfire missiles), I guess I would be ok with that? I am however not positive that it would work, seems like even the hellfire variant did not really defeat the Taliban.

I think that less flashy responses, like trying to limit the amount of arms smuggling from the US into Mexico, plus having law enforcement counter the cartels when they operate on US soil, are likely more effective to counter spreading cartel influence.

I think that less flashy responses, like trying to limit the amount of arms smuggling from the US into Mexico, plus having law enforcement counter the cartels when they operate on US soil, are likely more effective to counter spreading cartel influence.

Yes, but these don’t let Greg Abbott campaign on having taken the gloves off.