site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   31197 thread views

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
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yeah, yeah. Median monthly salary in Russia is around 400-500 USD

https://tass.com/economy/1301957

Just a little lower in Ukraine. Somehow this huge GDP and revenues from exporting raw materials didn't translate in passable living standards for people outside of several large cities.

According to World Population Review, Russia's median income is $5500 to Ukraine's $4400, which is a fairly substantial difference.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/median-income-by-country

Consider also that if it weren't for Russian aid and debt relief, Ukraine's situation pre-2014 would've been much worse. Cheap energy is good - nobody is saying that the fad of refusing to buy Russian gas imports is a great opportunity for Germany since they'll be able to 'reform their economy'.

Adjust it for the cost of living which will make the difference negligible (of course, the war made everything costlier, but Russia can make drop a few nukes on Ukraine to make life there completely miserable).

Consider also that if it weren't for Russian aid and debt relief, Ukraine's situation pre-2014 would've been much worse.

Russian "aid" enriched Ukrainian oligarchs, barely anything of it dripped down to the general population, and reliance on Russian gas made investment in domestic production unprofitable. People talking about Russia relieving Soviet debt apparently forget the fact that Russia got most of Soviet assets, but also a lot of countries had debts before Soviet Union — now they had to repay Russia.

Adjust it for the cost of living

It's already in PPP terms, cost of living is adjusted for.

Russian "aid" enriched Ukrainian oligarchs, barely anything of it dripped down to the general population, and reliance on Russian gas made investment in domestic production unprofitable.

During the early 2000s, Ukraine was using its large Soviet-era metallurgical industry, powered by cheap Russian gas, to export steel and grow fairly quickly. Workers do work in steel mills, there are benefits for the stability of the currency. That Ukrainian oligarchs were enriched during this process does not mean Russia/Soviets was evil for providing all these steel mills and cheap energy to run them.

People talking about Russia relieving Soviet debt apparently forget the fact that Russia got most of Soviet assets, but also a lot of countries had debts before Soviet Union — now they had to repay Russia.

That doesn't make any sense. What are you talking about, tsarist-era debt? Was Ukraine accruing much debt during its brief existence post-WW1? If Russia gets 75% of Soviet assets and Ukraine 15% but Russia pays all of Ukraine's share of Soviet debt, it follows that Ukraine comes out ahead.

It's already in PPP terms, cost of living is adjusted for.

OK, I didn't check your link. Anyway, I cannot speak for everyone, but this difference of 20% is pretty negligible in comparison to living in a country where I wouldn't be beaten by riot police if I'd decided to attend an anti-government demonstration. If you post on this forum, you supposedly value such freedoms (yes, yes, Ukraine is far from perfect when it comes to civil rights, but we are comparing Ukraine and Russia, not Ukraine and Denmark).

That Ukrainian oligarchs were enriched during this process does not mean Russia...

Russia was actively corrupting Ukrainian politicians and oligarchs through its gas, check RosUkrEnergo for example, they weren't just passive bearers of gifts like you want them to present here.

...Soviets was evil for providing all these steel mills

Stop this Soviet-built-Ukrainian-industry bullshit. Ukraine, for example, had a major role in developing Russian oil industry in Western Siberia during Soviet times.

That doesn't make any sense.

I phrased it poorly. Many countries like Cuba, Mozambique, India and such were major borrowers from USSR. They went on becoming borrowers from Russia, not Ukraine or any other post-Soviet state.

If Russia gets 75% of Soviet assets and Ukraine 15% but Russia pays all of Ukraine's share of Soviet debt

From a purely mathematical standpoint — not necessary. If the total assets, for example, were 250 bn USD, and the total debt was 25 bn USD, it would be beneficial for Russia to repay those 25 bn instead of Ukraine, in comparison to the scenario of Russian/Ukrainian split of 70%/20%, but Ukraine repaying all of its supposed share (5 bn in this example) themselves. Don't forget that Russia got all the nukes, most of the Black Sea fleet and all other Fleets, Soviet gold reserves, property abroad like embassies etc.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats