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 -
Russia has been making everything for itself for 100 years -- can they no longer do it? I don't know, and unless you are involved in the Russian MIC, neither do you.
As may the Ukrainians, one might suggest?
This is not correct, even during the Stalin era.
Soviet industrialisation in the 1920s and 1930s was supported by Western governmental and non-governmental aid.
Soviet technological and defence industrial development in the 1940s was massively helped by Western aid, plus plundering Eastern Europe and especially Germany (the Soviet's own Operation Paperclip etc.).
Soviet post-war development was greatly helped through joint ventures with Western firms, e.g. Tolyatti became the Soviet's Detroit thanks to a joint venture with Fiat. From the 1960s onwards, the Soviets were also greatly helped by importing subsidised American and Canadian grain: essentially, North Americans were being taxed to give the Soviets an easier choice between guns and butter... Well, at least guns or bread/potatoes. This was part of a wider Western Cold War strategy to maintain the Soviet regime as a "stabilising" force, which continued until about September 1991 when the doom of the USSR became obvious even to the White House. Note that this is different from the Soviet's projection of power beyond their borders, which the West did try to stymie.
Afterwards, Western aid was crucial to the survival of the Russian economy in the 1990s, and even then Russia was a basket case until oil prices rose.
Russia has never been an independent industrial power. It suits Western governments to downplay their support for Russia and it obviously suits Russia to downplay their dependence on the West, but neither side has done that much to cover up the history of this relationship.
More options
Context Copy link
First of all: for a significant portion of that period that "itself" involved a host of captive peoples and their resources that Russia simply doesn't have anymore. They're free...and some of them are in NATO which is doubly bad. Then there's the demographic issue of an aging population...
Second: post Cold War Russia was not behind some Iron Curtain. It traded with the West and its industries to help facilitate its own work. Sanctions weaken or cut this link and it's already been suggested that it has negatively affected their military capacity. Is it going to get better? (Arguably this issue goes back to the Felon, where sanctions and other problems mean we haven't really seen them in play in any significant number when you'd think Russia could use them the most)
Third: Russia has large stockpiles of weapons, but it has been using them in Ukraine. And there's the aforementioned 'sanctions" and "you don't control a large empire anymore" issues in terms of rebuilding said stockpile.
Yes, but the Ukrainians don't have to do their own manufacturing and have far more chances for international support and are fighting defensively.
Right, so you don't know what Russia's manufacturing capacity looks like ATM either. Speculation seems pointless.
The one thing that the international support does not provide (much) is soldiers -- if morale breaks on either side, this will be a problem. And it's not a uniquely Russian problem.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link