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 -
Ah yes but somebody would've figured out synthesizing nitrogen eventually. If it wasn't Haber, it would've been the next-best, next-luckiest chemist. As guano prices rise, more money and brainpower is brought to bear on the problem. Someone was always going to figure out quantum mechanics, eventually. In a world without Jews, people might've figured out nuclear weapons somewhat slower but it would still have been achieved. Likewise with polio vaccines.
Politics and culture is vastly more important than science since culture and politics are one-shot things. If you lock in feminism to the Japanese constitution and the birthrate plummets, never to recover, then that's brainpower that is forever lost, it cannot be rediscovered. If you (Trotsky, Zinoviev and the rest of the gang) impose a horrendously bad form of government on a huge swathe of Eurasia (then get overthrown by Stalin and Beria who do their best to match and exceed in terms of brutality and waste), then that can never be undone. Let's not forget galaxy-brain Von Neumann's plea to immediately wage nuclear war against the Soviet Union and kill tens of millions more. If he'd been listened to, if people had trusted his game theory over their own common sense... Well someone else can invent computer architecture - nobody can bring the dead back to life.
Over the last few years, how many people weren't born because of Ehrlich and co's overpopulation meme? How much wealth has been squandered? Nobody can be sure but the amount of brainpower we lost to communism and bad politics (which is admittedly multi-causal but heavily influenced by ideas promulgated by Jews) is immense. My bet is that it outweighs Jewish contributions to science by far.
Good point. But the key thing hinges upon the necessity of the enmity. If you have a neutral, then you should not offend them unless necessary, especially if they're powerful. But if there's an enemy on the verge of attaining total power over the world? If protesting at the sinister entrenchment of political bias in GPT, for example, is making a threat, so be it. It's rather similar to the adage 'When You’re Accustomed to Privilege, Equality Feels Like Oppression'.
Likewise, brainpower is needed in a conflict with China. But there are other options - we could abandon our crusade to impose LGBT rights and liberal democracy upon Beijing. Acknowledging China as a legitimate non-democracy would have soothed much of the problems. Or we could've been more disciplined earlier on! Goldman Sachs and co could have not blindly sought profits from the Chinese market... A less Open Society would not have brought in Chinese students and trained them in advanced technology, so they could then leak IP back to China. A West that had a genuinely nationalist policy would not have let its industrial base be carved out and send to Shanghai.
There's a combination of high intelligence and insufficiently high wisdom that is very dangerous. It can make money and innovation - but also bad money and bad innovations like coin-clipping or communism, Middle East regime change, pre-emptive nuclear war, pumping sterilization drugs into the water supply as Ehrlich proposed. Better to match moderate wisdom and intelligence, advance swiftly but not recklessly embrace radical ideas.
Even so, I respect the novelty and refreshing point of view of your argument. But don't you think that it's a very unlikely ideology to work? I've spent a lot of time reading and never come across anything like what you say. People more naturally think in terms of 'threat -> enemy -> weaken/destroy' than 'threat -> cooperate -> ally'. Why else are there wars in the world?
More options
Context Copy link