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 -
Thank you for the reply, it was interesting to chew on.
Maybe this is a Only Nixon could go to China type of moment.
Kind of hard to beat an opponent you're not allowed to touch their core.
This feels like learned helplessness. China doesn't seem to have a drug crisis, is it not profitable to sell fentanyl to Chinese citizens from across their borders? Why not?
The difference is that Mexico is our neighbor, and their gangs are literally controlling territory inside the core of the United states. And yes, we better have learned a lot of lessons since Afghanistan.
I saw the whole documentary. The fact that this sort of thing is acceptable or met with shrugs, they're just too strong, too manly for us to control makes me want to short America and long China.
This is the strongest point. I'm not sure I can fully address it. But isn't Russia busy enough? Would they risk aggravating the Unites States even more, especially now? I just don't see it. Will China go mask-off? Maybe.
Are they actually willing to transform their enterprises from successful money-making operations to Afghan-style insurgencies where they hide in tunnels for weeks? What will their leaders do once their compounds, palaces, armies, themselves start blowing up?
Agree here, but there are also certain windows of opportunity that may or may not stay open forever. Is China more or less likely to involve itself next year? The year after? How long do you suffer this violation in a contested world?
Yeah, and then the cartels move shop to Colombia and we invade Colombia, then they move to Peru and we invade Peru, another global war on terror, another trillion dollars playing whack a mole for a decade plus, just to get outlasted once again and withdrawal, hooray
If most trafficking has to come by boat or plane I'd be ecstatic. I see your point about scope creep, seems like a trap the US has fallen for before.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I don't like falling in the same camp as the 'China is the source of all evil' people but there is a good chance that the Chinese state is smiling on people exporting fentanyl precursors to the US. "Try to wreck our high-tech industries with sanctions and keep us in the middle income trap? Plant COVID on us (note that China also has an official history that the US used bioweapons against them in Korea)? We will bury you in narcotics, we'll wreck your high-tech industries with IP theft and industrial policy."
The key thing is that they're not that strong militarily. Drug dealers are pretty manly I guess but that won't help them if you whisk them away to have their organs harvested like China does. Police >>> drug dealers. But the key thing is mobilizing the will to crush them. El Salvedor proves it's not about material capacity but about will, that's what I'm fixated upon.
If the US went in with the will to win, no matter what, they would find wiping out the cartels to be easy and quick. It truly would be shock and awe. Britain and the Soviets casually partitioned Iraq and Iran during WW2 while they were fighting much more serious battles elsewhere, it was trivial for them. Conquering Iraq would be easy in military terms for the US. But it's impossible politically because the necessary will to win doesn't exist. These poor US soldiers were constantly capturing jihadists and sticking them in prison (where they exchanged tips with other jihadists) - then releasing them only to capture them again. There was no will to fight seriously and no proper campaign objectives. They rushed far too quickly to elections and democracy.
The US conquered the Philippines back in the day, it's really not that hard to squelch opposition with force. But you have to do imperialism consciously and confidently, you can't go in thinking 'I'm going to liberate these people with freedom and human rights to form a liberal democracy', you have to be serious about controlling the food, water and fuel, about appointing the puppet government (or maybe just a military governor) and crushing dissent. You have to have the credible threat of massive retaliation looming behind you as you restructure and create a new government.
The US can't bring itself to put on the face-covering villain helmet with the glowing red eyes and do this kind of thing. That's the key lesson of Afghanistan IMO, if you want to win you have to go in and make them play your game rather than try to appeal to the natives. Force them to stop raping children, force them to stop planting opium, forcibly relocate them, force them to respect you as the stronger party, not a pinata full of cash to be siphoned away with tricks and wordgames. That's what the US did to Japan and Germany, they basically razed and raped two powerful countries into submission.
Their beef should be with Britan, we didn't do the opium wars, no fair!
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link