This is a weekly thread for people to discuss international news, foreign policy or IR history. I usually start off with coverage of some current events from a mix of countries I follow personally and countries I think the forum might be interested in. I’m increasingly doing more coverage of countries we’re likely to have a userbase living in, or just that I think our userbase would be more interested in. This does mean going a little outside of my comfort zone and I’ll probably make mistakes, so chime in where you see any. Feel free as well to drop in with coverage of countries you’re interested in, talk about ongoing dynamics like the wars in Israel or Ukraine, or even just whatever you’re reading.
What is this place?
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
If in doubt, please post it!
Rules
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Azerbaijan
Time Magazine ran an article Tuesday warning that Azerbaijan may continue with their conquest of Nagorno-Karabakh and actually mount a joint invasion of Armenia, supposedly with the goal of connecting their country fully to their close ally Turkey.
Breathless speculation? It seems a little excessive and reading too much into things to me, but they did just conduct an expansionist invasion a couple weeks ago so it’s not that outlandish I suppose. US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken has also warned of an invasion into Armenia.
On the other hand, while the world already recognized Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan and, I guess, just didn’t give enough of a shit about the situation to care that the entire place got ethnically cleansed, invading a sovereign nation would be quite an escalation. Also worth noting this is a sovereign nation that has been balancing more towards the United States and has even been conducting joint military drills together. On the other, other hand, America didn’t do anything about Artsakh and is too dysfunctional right now to approve aid for their actual priority countries in Ukraine and Israel, so (if the speculation is true) maybe they’re wagering America is too tied up to care or do much at the moment.
Technically speaking, artsakh didn’t get ethnically cleansed because the Armenians did the smart thing and left on their own before Azerbaijan ethnically cleansed them. Yes, they did this because Azerbaijan didn’t bother to pretend it wasn’t going to do that, but there’s no international law against claiming you’re going to ethnically cleanse people.
Repeatedly and credibly threatening to do bad things to specific ethnicity, and having history of doing bad things to specific ethnicity also counts. You do not get bonus for other side not being dumb and able to predict obvious events.
More interesting is that Armenia expelled Azeris relatively recently, with other rounds of the same stuff.
Yeah it does give the events a very different flavor, not that it justifies what’s happening in the present day.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link