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 -
God, I absolutely hate attempts to subsume so many different things under "ethnic cleansing" or genocide.
Gaza is a smoldering ruin. The US gov is, as far as I can tell, not indicating a desire to send its remaining denizens to a gas chamber. It seems they're being relocated, presumably with enormous amounts of US aid and direct support, with US forces probably being more palatable to the locals than Israelis would be, the place is being rebuilt from the ground up, at which point I presume return tickets might be booked.
If this is "ethnic cleansing" in a manner that deserves to be condemned, so am I when I do a bad job with my laundry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing
https://www.britannica.com/topic/ethnic-cleansing
attempt to create ethnically homogeneous geographic areas through the deportation or forcible displacement of persons belonging to particular ethnic groups
the systematic forced removal of ethnic, racial, or religious groups from a given area, with the intent of making the society ethnically homogeneous
The Likud party platform calls for the Jewish state’s control over Gaza. Le Monde’s editorial board calls it ethnic cleansing. From the BBC:
Ethnic cleansing is a term developed in the 80s, so it is obviously not defined by events before that. The assertion that Trump is rebuilding if for Gazans to return is… more than fanciful. If Jewish Israelis want to ethnically cleanse Gazans, they should do it themselves — with their own blood, money, and reputation.
Ethnic cleansing is good, actually. You want your places clean, after all.
Multiethnic countries don't work, or don't work for long.
The two countries that will be carrying out the ethnic cleansing have been multiethnic since their inception, though largely of one faith.
America has not been multi-ethnic since its inception.
I think we may be using different definitions. Was pre-1990 South Africa multiethnic under your framework?
But if for some reason the United States doesn't count as a long-term stable multiethnic country, Israel certainly does, as do Brazil, Singapore, Malaysia and Chile.
Singapore isn't even as old as my parents, and neither is Malaysia, and neither is Israel. None of them have survived a single human lifetime.
Chile and Brazil are at least old enough to even bother looking at, but at inception they were not multi-ethnic, either. Chile and Brazil were founded, much like the USA, as former colonies, and made up primarily of people from those home nations.
As nation states are a relatively new phenomenon, I'm afraid most examples wouldn't be able to meet your stringent demands for longevity.
So maybe we should take a wider view. How long did the incredibly multiethnic Roman, Persian, and Ottoman empires last?
Btw, was pre-1990 South Africa a multiethnic country under your definition?
Quite literally, the Afrikaner/British split was a major part of life there.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link