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 way I heard the story, a warlord in the somalian civil war attacked UN troops distributing aid – and so the US obligingly went in because they didn’t have anything else to do that day. But you reckon this was a machiavellian exploitation of the third world that now justifies a somalian revenge ?
Yeah, and they say: 'I don't care if foreigners kill each other, even if we could prevent it easily'. Are you ready to stand by that statement and policy, or were you just using US interventionism as an excuse for foreigners to not be bound by any standard of decency?
Can you? That was the Libyan operation in a nutshell. Qaddafi was this comic-book villain - Susan Rice announced that he was giving his troops viagra so they could rape more effectively: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/29/diplomat-gaddafi-troops-viagra-mass-rape
It would be so easy to topple him and save the civilians from being massacred and raped! We, the West, started an air campaign that monstered the Libyan Army. Qaddafi ended up with a bayonet in his ass. Then the country collapsed into a second civil war. Arms from now-unguarded Libyan army caches found their way to Syria. Russia and China were incensed that their acquiescence of UNSC 1973 developed a no-fly zone into a bombing campaign. Russia especially was very angry that the energy deal they'd negotiated with Qaddafi ended up going to French companies and decided they wouldn't accept the same thing happening in Syria. All this happened after Qaddafi denuclearized in 2003, sending a very clear signal to Iran and North Korea.
Seemingly simple actions have all kinds of complex, dangerous outcomes. We blew up Qaddafi, Libya is now split in two, Europe was destabilized by the refugee flow and international law took a major blow.
More options
Context Copy link
No, not necessarily revenge. However, the US government clearly feels itself largely free to intervene wherever it pleases to in the world and can get away with, so from a moral perspective (not that I necessarily care about the moral perspective) I don't see why foreigners should not feel themselves largely free to at the least move to the US and advance their own ethnic interests.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link