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 -
Well, they haven't produced the desired result of 'Russia being unable to sustain its war effort', 'Russian elites overthrowing Putin due to not getting luxury imports' or 'China being unable to reach the frontier of AI research'. The Russian economy is performing quite well. Everything seems to be going up, real gdp, real incomes:
https://carnegieendowment.org/russia-eurasia/politika/2024/05/russia-war-income?lang=en
They're not totally ineffective. But most small, thin, unfit women aren't totally ineffective at fighting. They're just not significantly effective. They still lose vs big strong men.
Failing to prevent Russian oil from ending up in western markets is a failure of application. Sanctions shift the expected outcome by making the sanctioned party pay a higher cost to achieve their goal. In the case of Russia, this means the point at which they are no longer able to sustain the war effort arrives sooner.
The Russian economy is not doing quite well, it is verging on stagflation.
https://carnegieendowment.org/russia-eurasia/politika/2024/11/russia-central-bank-dilemma?lang=en
The case for China is much murkier. But if one starts from the assumption that ASI are of the same level of strategic significance as nukes, improving your chances of getting there first seems like a defensible position to me.
More options
Context Copy link
Russian GDP is not doing so hot (I can't find a good multi year graph that goes up to nearly the present day, but this serves to show the recent trend). It's true that rumors of Russian collapse were obviously overblown but that doesn't mean they don't work at all.
5% growth over the past year is not hot? Any western country would consider it a miracle to have that growth rate. For reference america, which is the western country which best recovered from covid, has a growth rate of 2.5% over the past year. Honestly I was ready to accept your claim that the russian economy is doing bad until I saw the chart you linked. Now I'm wondering how they managed such impressive growth under such a restrictive sanctions regime.
It's not that hot when there's zero growth since 2013. It's easy to have a year with big growth if you crash beforehand.
if you switch plot to constant 2015 US$, it shows growth and if to PPP in current international $, it shows nearly 2-fold growth.
More options
Context Copy link
I feel you're losing the plot here. We were talking about recent sanctions effect on the economy. Why are you bringing up the last decade when the discussion was about the last 2 years of economic growth?
Because sanctions have been in place since the invasion of crimea in 2014.
The discussion started over claims about russian oil and gas which weren't significantly sanctioned until russia invaded.
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
Russia is also not doing so hot on metrics of Diversity, nor on total amount of Californian wine consumed. Why is any of these three things relevant?
Take it up with ranger if you don't think GDP has any income on material living conditions.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link