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 -
I'm not making a value judgement here. I'm looking at the positions that Cooper holds or considers reasonable to hold. Those positions include value judgements.
Let's not retreat to the motte here. The original phrasing was "run the media" and "ZOG".
I don't see why not. You have a list of demands here, but what is really the meaning of it? If one really believes Jews run the media and control the government, can one be satisfied with just nudging their governance a little bit on the margins? Surely if one accepts this world view, the demands should be much greater, to take back control of the government and media and ensure that it can't happen again (despite it apparently happening in "nigh every western" country).
What emotion can a "host" feel for a ruling population but hate, unless those rulers have killed those neurons altogether?
The original phrasing doesn't need to imply anything beyond what Cooper himself would want it to imply. If the government is run by jews then that's a factual matter that can be examined. That's the position Cooper is affording himself.
The meaning of the demands is to illustrate that 'antisemitism' isn't magic that sprouts from thin air. People air their grievances. They purport to have facts on their side. If those are wrong then that should be exposed. Not buried under accusations that any inquiry is just a first step towards a second holocaust. And if those accusations turn out to be true then it falls on the accused to make amends, not dig their heels in the ground and refuse responsibility.
It's also there to illustrate that inroads and peace between different people can be made if both parties are interested. It certainly wouldn't take much to get most of the right on your side. As has been demonstrated in France by Éric Zemmour, or to a lesser extend by Stephen Miller in the US.
Depends on how they are ruled. There have been plenty of multiethnic empires and countries in Europe. Why anyone would presuppose that harm would befall them if they acted with kindness and respect towards Europeans is a mental illness with no name.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link