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 -
It was probably a mistake applying them to everyone (including our allies) at once. But the two overarching policy goals (reindustrializing the US and isolating China) are good. And neither are likely to happen without a major kick in the ass to force people to move in that direction. So I'm hesitant to just flat out call the tariffs a mistake.
If you wanted to isolate China, you wouldn't immediately tariff their neighbors, you'd try to woo their regional neighbors to join your own aligned bloc. Ideally you'd do it in a group fashion to present a unified bloc and get more leverage -- a kind of organization of countries in the area.
I would call it the Across Asia Organization -- or AAO.
Interesting proposal, except the obvious counter-point that the parties involved would have obvious incentives to expect bribes in various forms in the name of being wooed, but then defect against a common tariff front against China in exchange for Chinese bribes. 'Play both parties off eachother for personal gain' is not exactly a hidden policy preference.
Breaking this defection option is why the EU makes surrendering trade sovereignty a precondition of the unified block, uses coercive instruments regularly against less powerful constituent members to punish/deter cheating, and is generally understood to be dominated by the more powerful members and regularly advances reforms to further centralize power to the net benefit of those central leaders.
Perhaps your read is different than mine, but I see no particular reason to believe the asian countries in mind are inclined to be bribed into a trade conflict with China, or into a EU-style trade block.
They all signed the TPP and we didn’t …
The TPP did not include anti-defection options for a common trade war block.
It was the anti defection option
If you ignored what it could or could not compel the participant states to do or not do.
Unless you care to cite the chapter and section providing the punishment mechanisms?
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
Tariffs are a tool, not a policy. The policy that was being implemented by the Trump tariffs was not a policy to reindustrialise the US and isolate China.
More options
Context Copy link
Given the how much the form theyve taken will lower the odds of sticking, and poison the well going forward, I think they are flat out a mistake.
Worse than a mistake, they are a blunder.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I correct myself - Tariff implementation and execution was a mistake.
I think it would have turned out ok if he'd stuck with them though, or at least not backed down the way he did.
It was kind of a retreat, but look at financial markets - they are very clearly saying that the April 2 tariff annoucements and their negative impacts are largely still in place. April 9 changed the country, but it did not change the fundamental policy misconception by Trump.
More options
Context Copy link
The bond market was starting to act up. Nothing good could have come from that.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link