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 -
Islamic Republic of Iran was, for each person killed in 9/11, ordered to pay upto 12.5M USD. If this rate was applied to Sandy Hook and Jones was the killer and not a defamer, he would be on the hook for only 338M USD, and not more than 1B USD.
Doubting and even suppressing massacres on an even larger scale, such as Katyn, was the official policy of the Western Allies, yet the majority position today is one of support for their general cause.
On the other hand, punishing lying "journalists", such as Streicher Julius, was also part of the Allies MO. So WW2 doesn't definitive precedent.
By a federal judge in New York.
Alex Jones lost in Connecticut.
Can we leave some room for regional variation as a thesis?
Because, tbh, this feels like the comparisons that Leftists do whenever one black person gets a lower sentence (or is harmed more) than some white person somewhere else. It's a large country with lots of laws, all sorts of reasons people could behave differently in different cases.
More options
Context Copy link
Wait, why was Iran (a Shia country) ordered to pay for an attack commited by a Salafist (Sunni fundamentalism) terrorist organization?
I'm not sure why you find "lets help random terrorists/revolutionaries who oppose our regional (Saudi Arabia) and global rival (USA)" an implausible motivation for Iran's helping Al Quaeda.
Next up, why would a Democracy help Wahhabi Jihadis in Afghanistan (against the Soviet Union)? Why would a Woke nation help literal Nazis in Ukraine (against Russia)? Why would a Communist country help Nationalists in Puerto Rico or Ireland (against the USA)?
I don't think the IRA were really all that interested in America; if anything, Irish-Americans were probably already sympathetic. Now, Britain, on the other hand...
My point is that the Soviet Union (a communist, and therefore anti-nationalist) country supported the IRA. It wasn't because they agreed with Irish nationalism, it was because causing trouble for Britain was fun and in their interest. Same reason Iran might help AQ or other Sunni militant groups whose primary focus is on overthrowing MBS.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
because they got sued, and they didnt show up the court, so they lost by default.
More options
Context Copy link
The same reason Iraq got invaded.
More options
Context Copy link
Well maybe they should have thought of that before they chose to join the Axis of Evil!
It's funny how hard it is to remember now how ridiculous everything was after 9/11; the broader narrative got swept under the rug, and there's only these tiny unremembered historical anecdotes left, only collected by the former webmaster of antiwar dot com who was laid off in Jan 2009.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
But, why would anyone apply that rate? The damages are completely different; this wasn't a wrongful death action.
Note also that the award in the Iran case was set by a judge, and the judge in the Jones case is free to reduce the damages awarded by the jury. So, your comparison is at best premature.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link