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 -
Argentina, Colombia, Moldova, Ukraine, are all poorer than Russia, which itself is not conventionally considered a ‘high performer’. Indeed, thé entirety of the Balkans generates little ambition in its denizens except to leave the Balkans, and the nice white parts of Latin America are still nothing to write home about.
Russia is a high performer, not the best but still clearly in the top category. The US was relying on their spacecraft for the ISS at one point (which Russia helped to make) plus they produce a wide range of advanced technological products - drones, jets, tanks, warships, nuclear reactors. There are little robots transporting food and parcels on the streets of Moscow. Ukraine is similarly a high performer, also possessing advanced industry, they exported an aircraft carrier to China back in the day.
The whole 'Nigeria with snow' argument is profoundly silly. How hard would it be for the US or any major power to wreck Nigeria? Is anyone really worried about Nigeria? How do Nigerian industries affect the world, what ramifications do decisions in Lagos have on anything? Now, how about Russia?
Colombia is not white, it's 50% mestizo, 26% white, the rest being black or indigenous according to estimates.
Not amazing but still pretty rich and capable all things considered. Serbia is fine, they manufacture cars and pharmaceuticals. The whole 'former Ottoman Empire' part of Europe is less developed and orderly than one might expect from Europeans but it's not a barren gulf of civilization. That's what happens if you have non-European input into a country, you get less European output.
More options
Context Copy link
Depends how you're defining poor performance. Poor relative to other European or East Asian countries, sure. Poor compared to subsaharan Africa? Not really. The average GDP per capita south of the Sahara is $1500. Ukraine is $5000
That’s why I noted ‘doing worse than Russia’ which is crappy by white country standards but able to attract immigration from truly bottom of the barrel countries.
I don’t think this is an exhaustive list, at all. Just that crappy middle income countries are totally a thing that comes in white versions, even if truly awful undeveloped places are mostly restricted to blacks(although Afghanistan is racially white).
More options
Context Copy link
The richest black countries (the Seychelles, Trinidad and Tobago, St. Kitts and Nevis) are wealthier than the poorest white countries (Ukraine, Kosovo, Iran, Moldova). The poorest country is Arab (South Sudan).
South Sudan is literally not Arab(thats regular Sudan, and the ethnic difference is the entire reason for the split). The poorest Arab country is Yemen.
More options
Context Copy link
Trinidad: Half the people are indian, half the gdp is oil and gas
Seychelles : island micronation(120k souls) living off tourism
St kitts: island femtonation (50k)
The south sudan massacres, war and subsequent independence was fought between the muslim arab north and the mostly christian non-arab south. The name Sudan comes from the Arabic bilād as-sūdān or the "Land of the Blacks".
More options
Context Copy link
South Sudan is black and Christian, not Arab or Muslim.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link