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 -
On balance Russia is wrong. But the cartoon cut out of “Russia bad” is over the top.
There was on-going anti Russian people attacks in the Donbas. If there were a community of Americans living in Mexico that came under attack I imagine Uncle Sam might have something to say.
The 2014 coup and Ukraine buddying up to Nato suggests Ukraine was in some sense threatening Russia’s interests (the same way the US flipped out re Cuba and the USSR and the same way the US will flip out over PRC and Cuba).
Now I do think these issues, while influencing Russia, were not the principal reasons behind the Russian war (ie imperialism). So on balance I think Russia is the bad actor. But it isn’t the carton some people pretend.
American citizens regularly get kidnapped by cartels in Mexico.
More options
Context Copy link
There were indeed, e.g.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_2015_Mariupol_rocket_attack
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volnovakha_bus_attack
(please read the articles)
It wasn't a coup. If you make an inflammatory statement — provide the evidence.
The legitimately elected leader of the country was chased away by men with guns. How is it not a coup?
You can argue that it was a good and necessary coup, but I can't see how you escape framing the undemocratic and disorderly ouster of Yanukovych as anything other than a coup.
Do you have a video of him being chased away by men with guns? He was voted out by Rada.
"Coup" is a charged word, and is used to paint the protest, and post-Maidan government by extension, as illegitimate. So why not "Revolution"? Because it is reserved for events like American revolution, and pro-Ru Americans, despite them siding with Russians and Chinese, still venerate the Founding Myth?
The American revolution wasn't a coup, since it didn't topple the previous government but separated from it. George didn't have to flee to another country.
The US constitution, there's a coup.
Is it based on any academically accepted definition? Because then French Revolution isn't a revolution either.
My french constitutional lexicon says that a coup d'état is the overthrow of a power through illegal, usually violent, means by someone invested with authority.
Louis was overthrown, Georges wasn't. The ARW was secession, not a coup.
So Maidan wasn't a coup either. An agreement has been reached, for an interim government to be formed, where Janukovich is still the president, and opposition leaders form the cabinet. But then Janukovich-controlled police shot at protestors, and he just left. He wasn't killed like Gadaffi. You might say — he was afraid for his life. But that is his problem. After that, Rada held a vote for his removal.
Those are just basic fact. They are a bit different from Russia Today version of events though, where violent Azov thugs chase the president and become the power, I understand.
So it is a coup. Intimidation counts.
Les cent jours were a coup. And Louis fled from Napoleon in similar fashion.
You can claim all you want the Emperor is the legitimate ruler of France and he didn't take power so much as stepped in after the king's dereliction of duty, we both know that's not how power works.
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
Wikipedia is far from a trusted source especially on politically relevant topics. So nope won’t read it. I’ve read enough to understand the Donbas is complex and yes there were anti Russian actions occurring. Again doesn’t make Russia correct but it complies the narrative.
As for the 2014 coup, I think most people are aware. Just because you like the freedom fighters doesn’t mean it isn’t a coup. Moreover, a cursory understanding of how the cia historically operated means any degree of uprising that “supports” globalhomo is in part astroturfed.
That's a nice way to deflect. The cases when Russians bombed Russian population in Ukraine controlled cities and locations are well documented. Those two are the best documented though. I also recommend to read materials from the International Court (Russia has its representatives there defending themselves, so it's not in abscence)
https://www.icj-cij.org/case/166/oral-proceedings
If you read quality source, you'd understand there is nothing deeply complex about it.
"Everyone understand" is a fallacy (building consensus), and it's a bad way to introduce garbage arguments about CIA and "globalhomo". Please build a good argument for why it was a coup, but taking into account events like disappearance of Janukovich, Supreme Council of Ukraine (Rada) vote for removing him, shooting at the protestors, introduction of anti-Constitutional laws on the 16th of Jan and so on?
Even in the west it's called "the Maidan Revolution", no?
All of the things you list might be good reasons to have a coup, but there's no reason not to call a spade a spade.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=FijiV_ISw2A
If you consider up to a million people in Kyiv alone a "small group", then it's a coup, sure.
I think the difference is important. Pro-Ru like to point that it was "undemocratic", and that it was instigated by CIA. While the first claim can still be supported (Janukovich wasn't deposed in an election), it is weakened by the demonstration of popular support of ousting of Janukovich. Even in Donetsk:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=d76wFtOzfds
If we are judging how popular or democratic things are by demonstration of public support Trump creamed Biden.
We generally think voting is the appropriate method.
The key word is generally.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_revolution
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
Russia is bad for attacking Ukraine unprovoked.
Even the war criminal Prigozhin who recently gained a lot of popularity in Russia said that it was a lie. Ukrainians were fighting clandestine Russian forces in Donbas.
Threatening “Russia's interests” or threatening Russia? Very different things.
Russian attack on Ukraine was a mistake even from the point of view of Russian supremacy because it was destined to fail. It has weakened Russia considerably and they are only themselves to blame for it. Now the question is why so many seemingly smart people don't see this? Even the baddies like Prigozhin have realized this. I can kind of understand why so many people in Russia have this delusion. The human nature of conformity forces them to adapt to follow even misguided leaders. But why many people in the west believe this nonsense that somehow Russia is going to win in Ukraine?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link