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 -
I think the most disturbing type of argument around Ukraine is the one that pretends to be doing it "for their own good". Like "Why don't you want peace, why don't you want peace? Why do you want your people to die?" to the victims of a dictator invading their home, bombing their cities, kidnapping their children and stealing their land. If they aren't settling for your offer it's probably because they don't think your offer is good enough to actually protect them. They're in desperation, if an offer was convincing they would take it. So why not?
They've been promised security before, they gave up their nukes for it. They sign a deal that Russia won't punch them in the face, Russia violates it twice and if they don't want to just sign another without a stronger third party guarantee, it's not because they don't want peace. It's because they know Russia can't be trusted.
They don't think American investments means much, before the war there was that joke rule of "no two countries with a McDonald's have ever been at war" which was essentially emblematic of this concept. That international business interests for peace were simply too strong for a country to overcome, and yet the war happened anyway.
If someone doesn't want to support Ukraine fine, there's lots of other bad stuff we ignore and don't help out with. But those people spreading this idea that "they must want to be invaded and die so not helping them is actually the best help", I just find that really sickening.
I posted my own treatise a few days ago. But the short summary is:
My contention is that #1 is maximally bad for Ukraine, it's an attritional war, and Russia can easily out-grind Ukraine over time. #2 may be maximally bad for the world (if it triggers WW3), though it may be the morally correct answer (depends on your morals, of course). By the actions of the aid providers, #2 is off the table because Russia losing is a red line for most. #3 stinks, but given the remaining choices, seems to be better.
I also don't think that a negotiated peace is sucking Putin's/Russia's cock or anything. It's accepting the present reality, especially when considering that we're not letting Russia lose.
Another angle is that saying that one "supports Ukraine," while sending a generation of her men to die is, to me, repugnant. It's treating the Ukrainian people as a pawn to use against Russia to simply tie them down and deplete their resources. While at the same time effectively destroying Ukraine in the process. I don't count that as effective "support." I will concede it's a rational idea if one is solely against Russia at all costs, but I think it's disingenuous to call it supporting Ukraine.
The 'with or without guarantees' in 3 is the crux of the entire disagreement though, isn't it. To simplify, Europe and Ukraine want 3 with guarantees, the US wants 3 without guarantees.
The version without guarantees is the one that could be said to be fellating Putin since it asks literally nothing of him that he doesn't want.
Why doesn't Europe give guarantees then?
I suspect that "Europe" (which could have given guarantees at any point since 2014, or 1991, or 2014) perhaps wants the United States to give guarantees. Or at least they don't want to give them unilaterally.
Indeed – they were obviously hoping/assuming the US would be part of any guarantee, but I would imagine European leaders are, right now in London, trying to figure out what guarantees if any they can plausibly offer by themselves.
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