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 am aware that the foreign policy apparatus of the US Government disagrees with me, but that's sort of begging the question. Look at, for example, the mass overrepresentation of Zionist influence in the architecture of the Iraq war. So saying something like "the foreign policy administration of the US Government disagrees with you" doesn't really engage my argument that American foreign policy interests are captured by Zionist influence, and a massively disproportionate of American foreign policy elites have strong loyalty to a foreign power! When in history would that sort of dual-loyalty be tolerated?
Joe Biden pandering to Israel by boisterously claiming that billions of dollars in handouts to Israel is the "best investment we make" would be strong evidence for my conclusion. Interesting that Biden symbolically downplays American interests and domestic investment by calling its handouts to Israel as the "best investment it makes."
I do agree, though, that American support for Israel is in-character for the USA. After all, there is probably no demographic more supportive of Israel than white Evangelicals, and that support is at its foundation built on superstitious belief in biblical prophecy and a subsequent high-regard for Jews as God's Chosen People... But the regard that white Evangelicals have towards Jews and Israel is not reciprocated, as there is no demographic that Jews hold in lower regard than white Evangelicals. The foundation for this "alliance" does not at all rest in sober-minded, strategic vision.
It's motivated by lobbying efforts of a a hugely influential portion of the American elite with dual-loyalty, combined with a religiously-brainwashed American base of support that blindly supports Israel based on biblical prophecy. It's in-character for the USA, but it's an indictment of that aspect of an American culture rather than a rational justification for the state of affairs or an explanation for why this alliance is so strategically important.
Those things have been the outcome of decades of the status quo. Zionism has had ample time to solve these problems and demonstrate its value as an allied stabilizing-force in the region, but it's utterly failed in that task. The future is not looking better. Why would we double down on just constantly deferring to Israel's insolence? I don't see an Islamist government as a likely outcome of a single-state solution. There are other compromises like Jerusalem being internationally administered.
Do I think Israel will nuke Istanbul? No. Do I think Israel would turn the Middle East to glass before it faces a genuine military threat? That's possible enough to scare me far more than Hamas nuking Istanbul. And it's scary because I know I cannot trust the American foreign policy apparatus to stop Israel from taking the entire Middle East down with it if it faces an actual threat to its "conquests."
More options
Context Copy link