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 -
???
What's the source on the broad left doing that?
Xianjing may be a just cause, but a just cause doesn't compel people to go to war. War with China would have severe second-order effects and US or US + Allies victory isn't guaranteed either. Also, what is this French empire you're talking about?
That's a separate criticism. Failure to consider "and then what?" isn't the same as having a Marvel-esque view of heroes and villains as the original comment implied.
https://www.cfr.org/blog/obamas-war-choice-supporting-saudi-led-air-war-yemen
I haven't seen the left disavowing Barack Obama, and I treat them like adults who are responsible for the choices they make. The left wanted Obama, Obama supported a ten-fold increase in the number of drone strikes and greenlit support for the war in Yemen. If Obama has been repudiated by the broader left since then, I'll retract my claim - but this seems like the sort of thing I would have noticed.
It is my contention that the exact same principles apply to Ukraine - it might suck for the Ukrainians, but that just cause doesn't compel people to go to war. Furthermore, this war is going to have severe second-order effects to boot, and it isn't like the US victory is guaranteed either. Hell, from where I'm sitting, it looks like Ukraine is actually losing the conflict right now.
I am indeed talking about Françafrique. I highly recommend that you learn a bit about it - there are a lot of interesting stories coming out of that part of the world these days.
Even if it isn't an exact match, failure to consider "and then what?" is absolutely a sign of an underdeveloped and immature view of the world. "They don't view the world as a Marvel movie with heroes and villains, they just view it as a small child does, with no understanding of the fact that actions have consequences" is not exactly an amazing defence!
Hold on just one second. That's not the correct comparison. You would not use the events of 2014 to judge whether the left supported him for it in 2012. You would need to point to his foreign policy statements in the 2012 election or even the 2008 election.
Except the US isn't at war with Russia. We're donating equipment and training Ukranians. So I don't see what your point is. In fact, the vast majority of Americans don't support US forces acting militarily in Ukraine at all.
I am indeed ignorant of Francafrique. I suspect the broader "left" even moreso. Ignorance isn't hypocrisy.
It is, nonetheless, a defense. If you're going to criticize someone, you should at least be correct in what you're criticizing them for.
Hey, terribly sorry - I actually went on a short holiday after you left this and the previous comment (I had a great time disconnected from the internet, for what it's worth). I'm more than happy to continue the conversation, but I find that reappearing a week later and continuing a talk in a dead thread is a bit passé, so I'd just like to ask if you're interested in continuing first.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Much of former French Colonial African is still de facto even if not de jure under French influence with the exception of the successful* "Coup Belt" countries. France is the poster child for the definition of neocolonialism.
You're talking about Francafrique? I don't know much about that, it seems like they're trying to reduce their footprint there. You got a source?
Source on what aspect? I was noting that characterizing francafrique as French (Neo)Imperial maintenance is not outside the overton window and that French armed forces do deploy regularly both to "provide security" to French aligned regimes and "peace keeping" in the less French aligned areas. Someone who might use the term Empire to describe the actions/area might use different terms than the quoted ones I used. I'm not aware of the French proactively reducing their footprint so much as being forced to given civil conflicts and anti-French attitudes of newer regimes.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link