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 -
You must be having an argument with someone else, because I have no idea what half your points have to do with anything I'm saying.
Yes, in fact they did, and this is elementary knowledge in geopolitical circles. Why do you think the Minsk Accords receive zero attention in the western press? (It's because western audiences that know about it, know that it completely blows up the western narrative on Russia-Ukraine)
You mean like the Azov Battalion that explicitly defined itself as Neo-Nazi? That one?
Because it works poorly as clickbait.
I am aware of it and it does not seem to be significant in this matter.
Facts that break the counter-narrative usually do.
Makes sense if you support western foreign policy. I'm fairly anti-war myself.
the same for me, and also against Russian invasions (especially in my country)
Indeed. It's almost as if the Minsk Accords should've been adhered to.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
What, then, were you saying when you went on about how the US "barely manages to keep its military voluntary"?
From the link...
Speculation on what was going on in Putin's brain is "knowledge", let alone "elementary"?
See, now you're looking like you're insulting me. Yes, I'm aware that the Azov Battallion exists. That does not, in fact, make "denazification" less of a figleaf. Russian state propaganda routinely uses "western nazis" as snarl words to legitimize its actions vs. the West whether the particular people in question wear the swastikas or not. You're doing the equivalent of pointing out that the stopped clock is right at one of the two moments when it does match real time.
You initially brought up the point about conscription. Look at what it was in response to.
Sounds like you never even read the preview.
Seems pretty hard to call it "state propaganda" then when they're reporting accurately.
Being right in one specific case that does not mean that they are right in general.
And yes, claiming it is all (or even in part) about nazis is a lie by Russia.
Glad to know RT's got more going for it than CNN does.
Not by your own admission.
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