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 -
Zelensky never wanted a war with Russia, won on a campaign of rapprochement with Russia, speaks better Russian than Ukrainian, had prewar business interests that extended into Russia and refused to believe Russia was going to invade until it pretty much happened (the CIA and MI6 tried to convince him months before he believed it). Then, after Ukraine’s surprising successes early on, it took Boris Johnson LARPing Churchill to persuade him into not signing the first reasonable deal Russia put on the table. This is all a matter of public record.
I think accusing Zelensky of being a warmonger seems therefore unreasonable. It seems very unlikely that a Russian-speaking PMC Jewish comedian and entertainment executive is some kind of hardcore blood and soil maximalist Azov Ukrainian ethnonationalist.
This was all true. But it's also hard to square that with the Zelensky of today asking for every weapon under the sun, wanting to make zero territorial concessions, and even "retake" Crimea which was only ever Ukraine's on paper. Like Trump, it's hard to tell if this guy got high on his own supply, or is merely bluffing to try to negotiate from a position of "strength". In which case, I don't much mind Trump bullshitting back. Zelensky wants to bullshit like they can push Russia back to 2014 borders? Fine, Trump can bullshit that he's 4% popular and started the war. If everyone is just making up bullshit, why not? The only one unhinged IMHO is the guy pissing off the state that has backstopped the defense of his nation. Maybe he's counting on the EU acting on their TDS and making up for this historic folly with material support that has thus far failed to materialize.
Either way I'd consider it a victory, so long as the US is disentangled from the whole enterprise. Although I'd be more happy with the war over so that the next Democrat in office doesn't just jump back in with both feet.
I don't see how not premptively and publically conceding Crimea to Russia prior to entering private peace talks counts as bullshitting that ought to be responded to with derision. This is just diplomacy 101. Formal recognition of the line of control as the official border between Ukraine and Russia is a major concession on the part of Ukraine, and should not be given without getting something in return at the negotiating table. After they wring whatever they can get out of symbolic gestures, they can start making more material concessions, but that's not where you want to begin haggling if you have the option.
I have never understood this insistence by his detractors that Zelensky speak completely truthfully about the strategic and military situation all the time. If my government were on the cusp of losing a war, I wouldn't expect them to shout to the heavens that supply lines were stretched to the breaking point, that there were mass desertions on the front, and that some loss of territory was inevitable. Their job would be to project the illusion of control and maintain public order while entering talks to obtain the least bad outcome, and to do otherwise would be a gross dereliction of duty. [Insert your preferred proverb about warfare and deception here].
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link