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 -
So a new peace treaty for Ukraine war just dropped .
Trump’s proposed Ukraine peace plan would recognize Crimea as Russian, accept Russian control over parts of Donbas and southern Ukraine, and offer Ukraine vague European security guarantees, unfettered access to Dnieper partial territorial returns, and U.S.-backed reconstruction. It also includes U.S. control of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant and a U.S.-Ukraine minerals deal. Vance said that the deal is final and in the case of rejection US will stop being a part of peacemaking process.
I think it's basically a great deal for both sides(I admit my bias cause for me any peace would be better than war). Ukraine loses nothing that it de facto has right now and gains territory in Kharkov, it can finally heal and maybe with some smart leadership, international investment and membership in EU it can rise to the heights of neighboring Poland, I doubt that it will and I already written on the motte why, but some chance is way better than no chance.
For Russia and specifically for Putin this is a way to claim victory after his many failures including starting this retarded SMO. Maybe for Russian state it would be better to deal with this close of an enemy once and for all, but it will not happen under current leadership and Putin is no nationalist, so even with total victory we would see semi puppet state in Ukraine that would break of as soon as possible. We are talking about person who still haven't annexed Belarus for christ sake.
I think kremlins are ready to accept this and even slightly worse versions of this deal, cause they already shown signs of it throught whole war, starting in March of 2022 and dictators are more likely to seek limited peace anyway. On the other hand Europe is actually putting some effort into its militarization, I'v seen news about new German ammunition facilities, and could collectively decide to continue the war even if US fully withdraws after rejecting the deal(which is in my opinion unlikely). That could prolong the conflict by another couple of years, probably lead to the Ukrainian territory gains but I can't see how it's worth the devastation that it would cause.
I pray that this is the end of this conflict, but I don't know that it will be. Formal recognition of Crimea is probably a non-starter for Ukraine, while I don't see much of value for Russia in this deal. The better Crimea strategy in my mind has been suspended animation and a decision to be made later. Ukrainian optimists can sell it as "Rebuild, join the EU, become wealthy, and then Crimea etc will want to join us and not Russia."
Why? Crimea is, and has been for the past two centuries, culturally, linguistically, and economically Russian. It was only part of Ukraine because Krushchev did a Kruschev in the 1950s and it didnt matter as they were all part of glorious Soviet Union. It became awkward after the fall of the wall, but they hashed out a compromise where Crimea operated as an autonomous region of Ukraine instead of a integrated one, the state that persisted for 30 years until Russia formally annexed it.
I don't condone the whole "starting a war" thing, but Crimea has never been Ukrainian in any but the most nit-picky sense, and blowing a peace deal over it would be catastrophically stupid.
Because formal recognition would completely obviate the postwar consensus that national boundaries are inviolable. Russia made no claim to Crimea at the time of Ukrainian independence, nor for 20 years thereafter. If countries can dredge up historical arguments for why they need territory that hasn't been a continual subject of dispute and get international recognition of the conquest, it opens up the door for any irridentist claim.
US/NATO waged war and took Kosovo from Serbia, and then formally recognized the resulting statelet.
Not to mention the whole dichotomy of:
Violating national territorial borders—very problematic, big yikes, you did a heckin imperialism, this unseats the rules-based international order
Bombing the hell out of a country, invading it with 900,000 soldiers, executing the leaders, dissolving the government, building an entire new puppet government at bayonet-point that is more friendly to your national interests, re-invading every time it looks like that puppet government might fall, all leading to countless civilian deaths—100 percent wholesome Keanu Chungus
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