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 -
To be sure, if future US administrations want to hit the 'reset' button and go back to the old ways of doing things, then they can try to be friends with whoever they like, as they have done in the past, as you note. However, the mainstream European left, right, and centre is deeply committed to the Liberal International Order that Trump is crusading against.
That means a Trump or future Vance administration has to look to the fringes for real allies, and basically no Communist or radical left organisations would given him a look, not least because of his stance on Israel and Gaza (which frustratingly are the primary fixation for the European radical left right now). That leaves basically only one group of parties that would are openly to a close alliance (as opposed to a marriage of convenience), namely the non-establishment nationalist right - parties like FN, Fidesz, AfD, and Reform, all of who have relatively cosy relationships with Trump already. However, the more Trump acts in ways that harm Europe's security interests, the harder it is for these parties to maintain this relationship, at least without suffering political harm.
Rhetorically, perhaps, but certainly not when it comes to investing money and manpower in actually defending it. I'm pro-Ukraine, and not particularly pro-Trump, but I find myself frequently defending him against these sorts of accusations because they're so hard to take seriously.
Your statement also applies only if we consider the Liberal International Order to specifically encompass the region around Russia and Ukraine. For instance, much of the mainstream European political class is quite unconcerned with China's ambitions in the pacific, or Iran's actions in the ME, which aren't exactly in line with the idea of the LIO. These statements about the LIO are mostly window-dressing for standard geopolitical concerns - when it's happening close to us then it's all about high-minded values, when it's far away then it's not our business.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link