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 -
Americans should care about it because they've been taught that national socialists declaring themselves the master race and committing genocide is bad, actually, and both their personal and political will ought to be bent/pulled forcibly toward the end of preventing such an occurrence. Seems to me that per the national mythos Americans ought to be ferociously outraged about people who believe themselves to be "god's chosen" ethnically cleansing their hated neighbors for Lebensraum.
The person I’m replying to thinks that mythos is perhaps the greatest fraud and/or mistake of the 20th century.
All of this rhetorical tap-dancing of course boiling down to the idea that SS believes that Zionists ought to be held to account for their vicious criticism of post-Weimar German behavior and their simultaneous total embrace of it while you believe they should never answer to anyone for anything.
No, all of this is rhetorical tap-dancing around the fact that he cries fake tears for Arabs while dreaming of a white Israel that guards against his enemies more zealously than Israel does. Almost all dissident right criticism of Israeli conduct in Gaza is envy, it's that it's "unfair". It's not principled criticism of settler colonialism (see their views on Rhodesia and South Africa).
This is a monumentally dumb argument. It's the literal inverse to "white nationalists can't complain about immigration because they immigrated to non-white territories en masse and took many of them over". If someone says mass immigration of Europeans to Rhodesia was good, but mass immigration of Somalis to Sweden is bad, should they be similarly "held to account"? 'Nooo, you can't possibly justify settlers fighting a war against barbarians who want to rape and kill them unless you ALSO justify them being expropriated and slaughtered in the land where they previously lived for a thousand years, which also led many of the survivors to flee to that very place'. Don't think so.
Of course you're obviously sidestepping the point that Zionist's criticism and hatred of Nazi Germany is blasted on full volume through all channels of media, politics, and schooling in the western world while all discussion of Nazi Israel's ambitions is kept thoroughly in-house.
This is a forum for the discussion of unusual, niche and often radical politics. Responding to that debate by saying that you can't criticize one view because the opposite view is more socially popular and more visible in the media is an irrelevance when the question is not about which view is more popular but about the arguments themselves. SecureSignals would like to live in a world where the inverse of your description is true, so the debate occurs on that basis.
This is only true if the "popularity" is organic and not yet another outcome of a concerted effort by Zionists to manufacture consent.
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
More options
Context Copy link