site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 31, 2022

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.

24
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Can you explain Jewish space lasers? Metaphorically turning the frogs gay was true- everyone’s gay now and we don’t know why.

Iron Beam and similar directed energy weapons. They can allegedly shoot down satellites. Apparently China, Russia, Israel, and the US have these weapons. There also may, or may not be, DEWs in space, which can either shoot down other satellites or possibly ground based targets (I can't imagine they'd be too effective shooting the ground, unless they are one time use, or spend a hell of a long time charging; maybe a nuclear powered one could do it?).

The Jewish space laser conspiracies started with simple 'space laser' conspiracies. There was a growing conspiracy around various forest fires being done by DEWs. Lots of videos of California neighbourhoods burned down, but all the trees and stuff being untouched; melted cars; and then there were 'strange' light beams visible on some weather satellites. I just follow conspiracies for fun, so I don't really try to remember all the details.

Then the Space Force came out, talking about how China and Russia had DEWs in space (or targeting space?). And so then the conspiracies around DEWs went into overdrive. I don't know how the Jewish part ended up being added, but I assume Israel. If not Israel, then it's probably just 'The Powers That Be'. You can attribute any conspiracy to the Jews.

Turning the frogs gay was about a chemical (atrazine) that was getting into the water (usually from runoff from farms), and frogs exposed to it would change into females. So it's really the frogs are trans, rather than gay. And if 'they' means the government, then I suppose we could blame them. So 'they are turning the frogs gay' is mostly true.

And space lasers almost certainly exist; whether they are space-based and shooting at other satellites, or ground-based and shooting into space. Don't know about space to ground. I imagine there's a >90% chance that a Jewish person was heavily involved in designing it. And I imagine there's a >50% chance that Israel has some. So Jewish Space Lasers seems mostly true to me, though probably not quite as nefarious as the wording makes it seem.

I don't know how the Jewish part ended up being added, but I assume Israel. If not Israel, then it's probably just 'The Powers That Be'. You can attribute any conspiracy to the Jews.

Jewishness got added because Greene mentioned Rothschild Inc in her original statement. This is why I said:

I think there was a few steps and a lot of filling in the blanks between what she said and something that's legit antisemitic.

Yes, the Rothschilds are Jewish, and some people probably link that to their conspiracies about them ruling the world. But they're also super rich, and people think they rule the world for that reason, too. We have no evidence (as far as I know) that Greene was coming at this from an antisemitic perspective, yet people quickly latched onto that, until people wouldn't shut up about "Jewish space lasers", driving me insane.

The frogs turning gay was almost literally true.

Also literally turning the frogs gay. (Really, turning the frogs trans, but who's counting...) I will never cease to be amazed at the ability of the internet to take Conspiracy Theories Czar Alex Jones and unerringly zero in on the like one thing he ever said that actually has a shred of evidence to it.

(To be clear, that effect has been questioned a bunch, and I have no idea what's actually up with it. But "Alex Jones cites a study that may not hold up" is hardly how you see the claim treated.)

Alex jones' talent is digesting tons of internet conspiracy info and sources, and regurgitating it in the most evocative, outrageous, and poetic manner. He also invariably always frames it US vs. THEM.

Thus sex deformities in amphibians caused by chemical runoff, turns into "THEY"RE PUTTING CHEMICALS IN THE WATER TO TURN THE FREAKIN FROGS GAY"

But 99% of what he says doesn't originate with him... it originates in invariably more respectable sources, or online discussion... but because he's such a virtuoso with phrasing, the most popular summary of the story is always his summary...

Most of his predictions aren't even predictions. As he says "WE HAVE ALL THEIR WHITEPAPERS", he just read the WHO documents about vaccine passports from like 2014, was going on about how they're going to take all your freedom away with a pandemic and vaccine passports...and then COVID hit and what do you know Alex Jones was right...except they'd openly planned and published their vaccine passport ideas in 2014, it wasn't a "Conspiracy" it was open policy, its just Alex Jones is the only person who hates them enough to read their boring speculative white papers about things that aren't going to happen, until they do.

deleted

It sure was lucky for the left that the Kochs aren't Jewish.

deleted

Honestly I'm not sure how many of his opponents even know he's Jewish. It seems like the median right winger thinks of Soros as "billionaire from something or other, eastern european but I don't know what country, uber-liberal views and supports lefty organizations in a way that isn't really fair and I couldn't explain why". Sort of like a less specific version of Bill Gates(who they also don't like).

The Rothschilds are the same thing; I'm not sure if they people ranting about their influence even know they're Jewish, or anything about what they are other than "vaguely wealthy family with vaguely sinister behavior".

My estimate is "about as many as those who know there is such a thing as Jews".

deleted

Thank you, I think you've well-put a lot of my frustrations over how people responded to Greene, latching so quickly onto anything that seemed like it could be used to tar her, when it's not quite so clear. When I first looked into what exactly she said, I also thought "wait... she didn't really mention Jews, exactly, why is everyone taking this stance in opposition to her?"

Because the Rothschild family features in a lot of conspiracy theories due to being enormously wealthy and influential during the 19th century. You really don't need any additional explanation for why a family that had that level of wealth and influence over governments for a century accumulated conspiracy theories exaggerating their power further. Look at the conspiracy theories that have accumulated about Bill Gates in just a couple decades. Someone did the usual conspiracy-theorist thing of playing Six Degrees of Separation and noticing they were connected to PG&E, and then MTG read and repeated it.

For fans of irony - Despite being super into any conspiracy as a kid, I used to mindkill anyone who mentioned any antisemetic conspiracy (this is back when I was a good boy, 11 or 12 or so). That was until I got accused of trying to spread antisemetic conspiracy theories for doing a history report on the amazingly cool (to a poor stupid x files fan) Rothschilds, who were so awesome back in the day that people still thought they ran the world. Apparently I was trying to dog whistle antisemetism despite not actually knowing they were Jewish (the term dog whistling wasn't used back then, the teacher just called it being sneaky).