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 -
Numbers like 99.9% and 100% numbers are just exaggerations to make a point. Realistically though, you probably need at least 80% of the population to be on board with the idea that it's not worthwhile getting engaged in suicidal conflicts with a neighboring country before that country can accept them as a peaceful neighbor. Otherwise there's too big a chance that violent minority seize power and redirect all resources to renewed war efforts. Frankly I'd be stunned to see any polls suggesting that even 50% of Gazans think it might be worth trying to make a decent society for themselves with what they have, as opposed to continuing pointless attacks against Israel. I believe that's the point Hanania is making - the PA could officially be installed in power in Gaza tomorrow but given the state of that society they'd just be overthrown by Hamas again (with popular support) and who would declare war again etc.
Right, I'd probably agree somewhere about 80%, with higher obviously being better! And right now with the state of tensions Hamas or something like it would just re-emerge, completely agree. Eroding support for Hamas is key here, and history unfortunately suggests that the only way to do that is time and lack of huge incidents.
Support from Catholics for the IRA surged when the UK put in place internment and very aggressive tactics and reduced when the UK pulled back, treated terrorism more as a police action, and began to lift discrimination against Catholics, this led to Catholics becoming wealthier, and with fewer direct reasons to hate the British, IRA support began to drop until Warrington and Enniskillen (where IRA bombs killed children and pensioners) meant their support collapsed. Then the IRA came to the table and accepted a deal they had basically rejected 20 years before.
But there are still attacks today, fewer bombings because those take more organizations but punishment beatings, shootings, kneecapping etc. So I think some level of violence is going to have to be built in to any realistic proposal.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link