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 wrote a short post about the reactions to 1. the collapse of a bridge in Germany due to poor maintenance and 2. the fact that Germany currently subsidizes the Indian metro. Contrasting the reactions of rightist cavemen on social media and leftist state media, I come to the conclusion that despite the fact that the state media is more accurate on the facts, their skewed politicized interpretation of the facts leaves the cavemen better off not reading the state media. Basically, the cavemen believe that Germany subsidizes the Indian metro to the tune of 100M€ and the state media counters that not a single cent of tax €s was send to India because the money was paid as an interest-reduced loan. I show why this argument is flawed and how we could have used a simple loan scheme to finance the maintenance of our bridges instead of funding the Indian metro, while taking on an equivalent risk exposure.
https://grauwacht.substack.com/p/midwit-media
This just seems a classic case of export finance? As part of the agreement, the article you link in the post states, Siemens will be doing a lot of work on the project, which explains everything. Most governments do this quite a lot as an inexpensive way of boosting exports and fostering good relations abroad - India does it too! Total nothingburger.
I don't have a strong position on whether the whole thing is a good deal or not. My problem is with the way the article communicates costs by pretending that providing an interest-reduced loan isn't costly in any way. Instead, what I would expect from a supposedly neutral state media outlet is that they present the pros and cons of this policy in a neutral and factual manner.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link