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 -
The “cease fire” people are the same people who were calling for a “no fly zone” over Ukraine.
I believe Israel has been seeking a ceasefire for about 20 years now. In fact, I’d say that their entire response here is because Palestine continues violating the various cease fires being implemented.
I disagree. I'm one of the people calling for a ceasefire, but at the same time I thought a "no fly zone" over Ukraine constituted suicidal imperial overreach and the start of WW3. I also don't believe that Israel has been seeking a ceasefire for about 20 years now - this claim just seems straightforwardly false to me. Have you heard the term "mowing the grass"?
Would Hamas agree to this ceasefire? For how long?
Attacking your enemy, then crying for a ceasefire when they retaliate seems a bit ridiculous. Maybe Hamas should have considered a ceasefire on October 6th.
I don't know - if you know any Hamas representatives on the Motte I could ask to find out, please tag them so we can ask. As for how long, ideally it would result in negotiation and diplomacy rather than violent military confrontation, hence being permanent.
To the best of my knowledge, Hamas isn't calling for a ceasefire. Westerners who played no part in either the initial attack or the revenge it garnered are the ones asking for ceasefires... but I do agree that taking territory then calling for ceasefires to prevent people from taking it back is a ridiculous strategy.
Then what are you asking for? If you don’t think that Hamas would even agree to it (and there is plenty of evidence that they wouldn’t), then what does this even mean?
I don't think the Israelis would agree to it either - but that doesn't mean I can't say that a ceasefire would be ideal and voice my support for it. Similarly, I protested against the Iraq war because I thought that simply not invading Iraq was a better idea, despite knowing that George Bush probably wouldn't agree to it.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
When they go in every couple of years and collapse tunnels, destroy weapons depots, and take out terrorists? What follows from that? Should they not do that?
Personally I think they shouldn't do that, but that question doesn't actually matter - we're not talking about morality here. The point being argued is whether or not Israel has been seeking a ceasefire - the "mowing the grass" term refers to them accepting a policy that requires going in and doing that every few years. That's not exactly what I'd call "seeking a ceasefire".
In response to new escalations. They they make a new ceasefire. Hamas defects. Defection escalates until they mow the grass again. Repeat the cycle. Which is the point. This cease fire, like all cease fires, would be followed by Hamas defection and escalation until they have to go in again.
The point being made is that the Israelis are knowingly pursuing and accepting policies that lead to violent confrontations every few years. I am not interested in assigning moral blame to anybody here - I am trying to answer the question "Is Israel seeking a ceasefire", and the Israeli policy of mowing the lawn is a sign to me that they are not.
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
Building settlements in the West Bank is a strange way of seeking a ceasefire. Israel is a small country, but it is not so small that there is no other room where Israeli Jews can build settlements besides the West Bank.
More options
Context Copy link
Any examples? Not generally what I'm seeing.
Out of the two pols I most associate with the actual no-fly zone demand in 2022 - Adam Kinzinger in US and Tobias Ellwood in UK - the first appears to be 100 % for Israel no matter what and the second has some qualifications about their tactics but is still mostly pro-Israel, and a quick browse of is timeline does not show a call for a ceasefire.
In my experience the most pro-interventionist side in the West regarding the Ukraine War was the sort of centrist or centre-right types who would at least mostly fall on the solidly pro-Israel side in the current war, particularly bolstered by the indications of a Russia-Hamas connection (how real that connection is is another matter).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link