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 agree that this becomes more credible if the MSM picks it up, and the fact that Kean and Blumenthal couldn't get it reported in the NYT/WaPo initially is disappointing, and if they don't pick it up eventually that would be a strike to the story's credibility.
A fair point.
My understanding is that he now feels more comfortable saying things because in some appropriations bill from 2022 Senators Rubio and Gillibrand added language providing some whistleblower protection for UAP information. From the article: Grusch "helped draft the language on UAP for the FY2023 National Defense Authorization Act, spearheaded by Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Marco Rubio and signed into law by President Biden in December 2022. The provision states that any person with relevant UAP information can inform Congress without retaliation, regardless of any previous non-disclosure agreements."
Also, apparently he got clearance to say these things from the DoD? Article says "his statements [were] cleared for publication by the Pentagon in April," and then also Ross Coulthart (Australian journalist) says the same here.
If so, I want to ask the DoD why they're giving people clearance to say untrue things. And if it is true, why have all these groundshaking scientific discoveries been kept secret from all the people who could have done something useful with it?
As presented, it makes the deep state sound like they've been doing absolutely nothing for decades and letting this stuff rot in a warehouse next to the Ark of the Covenant; 10 years after getting a hold of something, it shouldn't still be made of Unknown Elements.
For some categories of folks, I wouldn't be surprised if pre-publication review is mandatory. The DOD probably has to at least proofread any book by certain folks, even if they decide to write historical fiction. A memoir or anything close to their specialty could actually inadvertently disclose something classified. It's quite possible the folks here charged with "giving clearance" only care about a very narrow set of facts (names, places, dates) appearing.
Although I suppose claiming any degree of official statement or backing might be its own concern. But it's unclear to me this is actually claimed here: "the censors didn't censor my ramblings" isn't alone an endorsement.
According to this FAQ accompaniment to the story,
So...top-secret bases full of alien hardware aren't state secrets? What?
To me what this reads as is, like you say, this guy was a real intelligence officer, which means his statements have to be screened by the DOD to make sure he doesn't actually leak something sensitive, and the censors looked it over and said, "okay there's nothing serious in here, it's just a bunch of whacky alien stuff, go ahead and publish it."
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link