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 -
Because nukes.
Any geopolitical discussion on what Russia needs to survive as a state that does not acknowledge or address the role of second-strike nuclear deterrence is not a serious discussion.
And how is that any different between attack from Ukraine vs attack from eg. Latvia?
There is no meaningful difference. Any existential invasion from any direction remains deterred by second-strike nuke capability.
So you agree that having western troops in Ukraine is irrelevant for Russia’s actual safety because if they attack in force, ”Nukes fall, everyone dies”?
More options
Context Copy link
Typically though, you want to avoid situations where your two options are “lose and die” and “press the small red button marked ‘The End of the World’”
Why would they lose and die when losing and dying is followed by the end of the world for the attacker who forces them to lose and die?
This is where we get to the sillyness of pretending nukes don't matter or adopting inconsistent nuclear deterrence paradigms. Somehow nukes would be used for the end of the world, but not the end of nuclear state to hostile invasion which will result in the death of the people with nukes regardless.
But you notice that in either case, they still die.
I think the point is that NATO, knowing they have nukes and are willing to use them, would choose not to invade in the first place. They still die in a hypothetical world where NATO wants the world to end. They live in the world where NATO doesn't want the world to end and chooses not to invade them, because they have nukes.
More options
Context Copy link
And thus them invading Ukraine does nothing to keep them from dying. It is a false pretense that doesn't resolve the problem it was claimed to prevent.
Ok, then why do Russia or America have armies? Why does China? Why does Israel? Why does France? They all have second strike capability, it’s just a giant waste of money for them to have armies. It’s especially wasteful in Israel’s case. No one has ever tried to invade and destroy Israel since they developed nuclear weapons, for the obvious reason that whoever tried it would be destroyed.
In the last 30-odd years since the end of the Cold War?
To wage wars of territorial expansion and to rebuild a sphere of influence, and because it considers itself an unjustly undefered-to great power.
To wage expeditionary wars of choice based on ideology, global interests, or- in some of the worse- inconsistent morality from its position as a great power.
To conquer Taiwan, counter the United States, and because it is fits the CCP leadership's view of what a great power does
To fight a regular series of insurgency conflicts based on immediate neighboring terrain, shape how openly certain regional actors support them, and maintain a means of geopolitical influence/favor currying to leverage into diplomatic support via security relationships that also bring in useful income.
To have a seat in the table of any American geopolitical coalition, as part of its strategy to build leadership influence in the European Union to advance french interests with European heft, and because the establishment considers France a temporarily embarrassed great power.
Only if you think the only non-waste of money use for armies is to defend against invasion.
All of the powers you listed have either fought or indicated an interest of fighting wars of choice against non-invaders.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link