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 -
Yes, the term is called German/French/Polish nationalism. Prussians and their other German allies had to fight two wars, first with Austria in 1866 and later with France in 1871 in order to secure the the new state as homeland for Germans in form of Keiserreich. The formation of French identity as a state was also fraught: France was in the past basically something like Holy Roman Empire. For instance even in 1806 only around 58% of people living in France spoke French with large minority in the south speaking Occitan, a language in similar family as Catalan. With one exception being that Occitan nationalism was nowhere near as successful even compared to Catalan nationalism that fuels separatist movements up until today. Also there is huge complication with French Guayana being territory of France
When it comes to Jews and Israel, the major difference is that Israel as home of the Jews was carved by invasion and conquest. In 1800 Jews was small minority of around 2.5% in Palestine, it increased to around 10% by 1890 as Zionism picked up steam - also "thanks" to pogroms on Jews inside many new states that were fueled by nationalist identities and who considered Jews as foreign elements. In 1947 before the Israeli war of Independence, Jews consisted of around 32% of population of Palestine. Zionism is the Jewish form of nationalism with all the usual steps: creation of new language of Hebrew out of basically dead religious language, a solution that was necessary in order to integrate Jews comming to Palestine from all over the world and a solution that prevailed over some suggestions such as using Yiddish in that way. However the extra step of invasion and conquest is something that in eyes of many people make the state of Israel having less legitimacy over let's say Germany or France. Heck, there are many people now questioning the legitimacy of USA due to the fact of conquest of native population. The very fact that questioning the legitimacy of state of Israel is not taken as a joke but as something that has to be squashed by force points to this inherent weakness. This is a similar phenomenon in Spain where Catalans and Basque peoples are questioning the legitimacy of Spain as a state and they are met with similarly strong response.
More options
Context Copy link