site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 9, 2023

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.

14
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If you don't think it's fair to apply the Convention on the Prevention and

Get rid of bureaucratic nonsense. I think that this word in everyday use has a completely different meaning.

can be found from Bucha to Kherson.

Both Russians and Ukrainians constantly claim that they find torture chambers in the occupied territories, this is probably just information garbage.

If we talk about Bucha, then we are talking about the alleged incident with the execution of men mistaken for artillery spotters, a guy on a bicycle who unsuccessfully rode onto a convoy preparing for battle and many civilians killed by Ukrainian artillery.

Get rid of bureaucratic nonsense. I think that this word in everyday use has a completely different meaning.

No, I decline to defer to your appeal for definition gerrymandering.

Many people use words wrong, but this is one whose context was specified, and whose definition for the scope of genocide has been an established part of international law longer than you've been alive.

And, you know, was refered to via the reference of international standards, to prevent confusion.

Both Russians and Ukrainians constantly claim that they find torture chambers in the occupied territories, this is probably just information garbage.

Well, that's one way to describe inconvenient UN investigations.

https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N22/637/72/PDF/N2263772.pdf?OpenElement

If we talk about Bucha, then we are talking about the alleged incident with the execution of men mistaken for artillery spotters, a guy on a bicycle who unsuccessfully rode onto a convoy preparing for battle and many civilians killed by Ukrainian artillery.

No, we're talking about the one involving torture and summary executions of civilians, as well as bodies being left in the streets for over a week as identified by commercial imagery despite Russian claims that the bodies were staged by Ukrainian forces as part of false allegations.

Soldiers who shoot at any moving target during battle - yes. The massacre of combatants, whom the soldiers consider to be combatants (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haditha_massacre) - yes.

But when a party that clearly has a conflict of interest and uses the statements of the Ukrainian government, which is quite often lying, starts telling stories that are clearly designed for an emotional reaction and are implausible from the point of view of hypothetical actors - I show a lot of skepticism.

Soldiers who shoot at any moving target during battle - yes. The massacre of combatants, whom the soldiers consider to be combatants (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haditha_massacre) - yes.

And in the Bucha case, the shooting of people bound in basements and in other places and forms of captivity.

But when a party that clearly has a conflict of interest and uses the statements of the Ukrainian government, which is quite often lying, starts telling stories that are clearly designed for an emotional reaction and are implausible from the point of view of hypothetical actors - I show a lot of skepticism.

Fortunately, the UN is not a party of the conflict, and used the statements of people they themselves interviewed along with sites they were granted access to, including sites and personnel that incriminated Ukrainians.