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 -
I'm curious what folks here think about tankies.
I remember seeing a twitter thread during the onset of the Ukraine war explaining why Russia and China growing powerful even to the point of imperialism is vital to combat western imperialism, "someone has to do it". Whether one agrees that Russia has been constantly provoked by NATO or not, its difficult to spin Russian actions as "anti-imperialist". Similarly, China's land and water disputes with its neighbours. It appears both these countries have become a sort of canvas to project their ideologies. They often call western conservatives "far right" and often attack their criticisms of feminism. But how do they explain China's own censorship of feminist activism, the fact that independent labour unions are illegal, the push for pro-natalism, the push for masculinity training, etc.? I've seen many articles countering the stories about Uyghurs, but not much on the above. What really makes the "tankie ideology" attractive? I can fully understand and even sympathise with their gripes over western imperialism and even Israel to an extent, but I don't get the narratives that its all the neoliberals and the "far right" against China, essentially projecting the whole issue as a new cold war of ideologies between neoliberalism and communism.
"Tankies" in the traditional sense barely exist any more. However, there's still plenty of generically pro-Russian Westerners. They tend to be right wing as other comments have pointed out, and they simply go through mental gymnastics of interpreting Putin's "denazification" of Ukraine as actually the complete opposite, i.e. it's it's a holy crusade against leftist elements, in particular immigration, feminism, and transgenderism. I have no idea how they resolve the cognitive dissonance between their own interpretation and Russian state narratives.
Because Putin doesn't believe that Zelensky who is a jewish comedian is an honest nazi. The Ukrainian elite is heavily influenced by neoliberal institutions and their end goal is to join NATO and the EU. The EU + NATO isn't exacly going to allow a nazi Ukraine. I am sure there are some Ukrainian nazis who think they are going to get a NATO backed fourth reich but they were mainly cannon fodder in Mariupol. The Ukrainian state's existance hangs on the support of the US government. They will not be having a white ethnostate for long.
The big issue here isn't Ukraine, it is neoliberal dominance of the world. Break free from neoliberalism and get the treatment that Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria or Yemen got. The US backs coups, bombs countries and financially blocks countries it doesn't like. No country in Europe is going to stray far from neoliberalism unless the power of the global neoliberal order is weakened. I support China, North Korea, communist Cuba and islamist Iran for the simple reason that they represent an alternative to the dominance of Washington. China just launched their C919 passenger jet giving us a path to a future in which a country doesn't have to bow to Washington in order to buy jets. I support Russia because I don't want a world completely dominated by Atlanticist elites but a multipolar world in which different countries and civilizations exists and can make deals with each other.
As for Ukraine, which part do you think will have the most third world migrants and gender studies in thirty years, the Keiv or Moscow controlled parts.
lol
This requires a lot more support than a mere idle mention. American foreign policy cares about money, influence, and power, not about heckin wholesome BIPOC.
America spent 2 trillion dollars on Afghanistan that has a GDP a fraction of the size of what it cost to put troops there. America signs trade deals that aren't even that lucrative, as long as it gets to crusade with its ideology. American NGOs have been pushing diversity hard in Eastern Europe, and Hungary is being sanctioned by the EU for not cooperating with liberalism. As for power the US wants diverse, atheistic, low trust societies that are easy to rule. A fat person twerking on instagram living by themselves and buying stuff off amazon is easier to rule than someone belonging to an actual society.
Yes, and this doesn't contradict what I said at all.
Trade deals aren't an ideological matter, unless that ideology is appealing to wealthy shareholders. So, money, not a vague hatred of Ukraine being a white country.
American NGOs are not the American state. The American state is eating popcorn and spending a fraction of its wealth on seeing its old rival bleed dry in a backwater. The Ukrainians get gadgets, intel, training, and money conditional on killing Russian invaders, not conditional on being good to gay people.
Hungary has been that way for over a decade. These sanctions got through this year not because of liberalism, but because Orbán is deemed not anti-Russian enough and threatened European disunity. Compare Poland, or Lithuania, or Latvia, or Croatia, or Bulgaria, countries no more liberal than his which do not get sanctioned because they don't then fuck with stuff the EU actually cares about.
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
More options
Context Copy link