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 -
Sigh.
Okay. Look.
If you take a look at the economic sanctions on North Korea as a cursory glance at Wikipedia, you see that they are not embargoed in terms of food, only its export. They can import as much food as they like from people willing to sell to them. Cuba is the same. Starvation happens in those countries not because of a lack of sellers, but a lack of hard currency to make imports with.
No one has ever accused of Jews of not having money.
As we've seen with Russia, both food and energy exports are not constrained. The technology necessary to maintain a modern economy is imported from a variety of sources, but even that can be overcome. The Mossad isn't experienced in playing shell games with corporations in Lebanon and Turkey. It is trivially easy for them to do so - that's how they got the pager bombs to begin with.
Sanctions and boycotts have not stopped these countries. Inconvenienced? Yes. But no sanctions regime is airtight.
I don't know why you insist on this being the silver bullet that fells the Zionists, but it's clear you in some form or another believe in the priors of BDS. All of these points are irrelevant, and as I said - fantasy. Eighty years of Arabs not trading with them have not caused them to collapse. BDS has gone on for twenty years and achieved nothing. Israel will always have American sponsorship, if only because it is where most of the world's Jews live, so it is a hypothetical of hypotheticals.
I don't know what to say but your beliefs in this regard are pure idealistic fantasy, and even if such events come to pass it would not result in the historical arc that you envision. My evidence, to counter your 'history', is all of the real-life regimes right now who ignore sanctions and embargos without great difficulty. Effort, perhaps. But existential they are not.
This is actually not true. There are real limits to the amount of food that can be imported to Israel due to their security situation - and remember that in this case we're talking about an Israel several years into the future from now, where their reputation has been torched and nobody is willing to support or trade with them. No more US money to Egypt and the other nations around them means no more land trade. The US giving up (well more than they have already) at dealing with the houthis means there's no more shipping, either. How does Israel import the materiel and energy required to exist without US support? This is a serious logistical question, and as far as I can tell the answer is that there's no way for them to do so once the US teat is removed.
Russia in the present day is an entirely different beast from a Pariah Israel. Not only was Russia able to continue to trade with China, they kept on trading with Europe as well - via India. Russia is a gigantic country sharing land borders with multiple trading partners that increased their investment in Russian trade after the US attempted to impose sanctions. Not only is Russia not dependent upon imports of any critical requirements, they have a substantial industrial and energy base which is actually superior to the US in several aspects. If Israel had the size and breadth of Russia, I'd agree with you that they wouldn't have anything to fear, but that's not the world we live in. There is a very big difference between having your exports of energy be cut off and having your imports of energy cut off, especially when that specific type of energy is mandatory for modern military equipment and logistics.
On the same note Russia, historically, has been an exporter of food - and there's a big difference between being a net exporter of food and a net importer of food when you get cut off from international trade. How does Israel import food, energy and fertiliser when they are cut off from Western support and largesse? Seriously, how? It can't be over land or sea, and air travel just isn't cheap enough to be viable. Throw in the difficulties of dealing with the black market (mandatory BDS laws seem like a safe assumption in this hypothetical) and you end up with a thoroughly untenable situation.
The cutting off of aid to Israel would be far more significant than the sanctions and boycotts. US support for Israel is more than just the 3 billion number that gets bandied around - there's immense amounts of financial support put into supporting Israel and their security environment. Even if Israel wasn't sanctioned at all, simply cutting off the vast flows of free money will have huge negative impacts on their society. Being forced to accept a worse price on your exported goods is one thing - being unable to import the basic materials required for human life and economic flourishing when you are unable to source them domestically is an entirely different one.
"My car has been driving for hours since I filled up the petrol tank, so I don't know why you insist on the tank being empty being the silver bullet that stops me from driving."
Beneath all the abstractions of economics are hard material realities. Modern first world societies are reliant upon vast amounts of energy and various other inputs in order to function - and Israel is simply unable to provide those inputs without extensive external support. This does not mean that Israel is going to immediately collapse overnight, but it does mean that Israel will be unable to continue in its present form. This is why I keep asking the questions I do - how does Israel maintain itself when it is unable to import the fertiliser it needs to grow food, let alone the extra food required to make up for the shortfall caused by lack of access to fertiliser and all the other imports required to maintain their agricultural sector?
Sure, that's a crisis they could probably deal with if there was nothing else going on - but when the US military support is cut off at the same time all the money required to fix the farms will be going to guns instead.
Israel is currently losing support in the US on both sides of the aisle. Have you looked at recent polling on attitudes towards Israel? I don't think this is nearly as much of a surefire bet as you - assuming present trends continue Israel support is going to be a hard sell for the political right in a few years, let alone the political left. Given that we're talking about a time in the future, what exactly do you think is going to reverse that trend?
How many of them are as reliant on external imports and support as Israel? How many of them are dependent upon security guarantees from other powers? How many of the real-life regimes that got killed by sanctions and isolation have you looked at to compare with Israel? You have the start of a good argument here, but you need to actually point out the points of comparison and why they're a good fit. Claiming that Israel can handle sanctions because Russia can is like saying that a chihuahua can protect a herd of sheep from wolves because a Pyrenean Mountain Dog can do the same thing.
If you are right and all this comes to pass then at worst they're in the state the Palestinians are in and the Palestinians get food. You even support their own genocidal government and oppose them not being given food aid. You can't actually think the world would be willing to starve Israelis to death for the crime of starving Palestinians.
The world was willing to execute Nazis after the holocaust even though their crime was executing jews. Any Israelis who did not voluntarily leave the country and renounce Zionism would be regarded the same as the nazis who didn't give up after the war was lost - they're actively committed to the project and voluntarily taking on responsibility for what Zionism did.
But that said, this wouldn't be the world starving Israel to death - Israel's remaining farmers would be able to produce some food after all. It just wouldn't be able to support a population nearly as large as it currently has, which would be a big problem when their military protection gets cut off as well. Food security is just one of the large number of threats waiting for an isolated Israel, and while it wouldn't be an insurmountable problem by itself the real issue is how it would exacerbate all the other problems they're facing.
This is a plain fantasy, has the world decided that everyone involved in October 8th should be executed in the Hague or that the population they ruled over should be starved to death as a result? Your entire premise defeats itself, it's ridiculous. A world that would turn on Israel for imposing these conditions would not impose these conditions on Israel lest it must turn on itself.
Somewhere north of 70% of Israelis were born in Israel. I know there is a false meme that the whole population are recent European immigrants but it's simply not true. There is no where for them to go any more than there is for the Palestinians.
If somebody imprisons innocent people in their dungeon and uses them for slave labor people don't actually find it hypocritical to sentence that person to prison. The world in fact did not object to imposing the same conditions on the nazis (death) that the nazis did to the jews. More importantly, those Israelis could simply flee as refugees or return to the country their parents left from - they're actively choosing to remain in their genocidal (remember that we're still talking about the hypothetical so the argument that they haven't been convicted yet is irrelevant) ethnostate. The fact that they are unable to feed themselves because they prioritised ethnic cleansing over sustainability is not really going to engender much sympathy or charity from the outside world.
This isn't actually a statistic that's relevant at all by itself. If you're the descendant of someone from an EU country, you're able to get an EU passport - it doesn't matter where you were born. The actually relevant statistic here would be how many Israelis are able to get a passport/citizenship for another country. All this statistic really does is establish that at least 30% of the country could just immediately fuck off back home if they objected to Israeli policy.
Are all the Gazans also getting sentenced to death in the Hague for supporting their own genocidal government that commits war crimes in this fantasy of yours? Maybe we could take out two birds with one stone and just glass the whole region to satisfy your bloodlust.
Less than half the jews in Israel are even European descendent. So your frothing genocide is still killing ~5 million people even assuming every European descendended jew is eligible.
Ah yes, the first ethnostste in the middle east. Curious that an ethnic state would have 20% of its population be Arab. What level of diversity do you expect to be present in the territory after you finish your retributive genocide?
Have you been reading the thread or did you just come in midway because you got asked to moderate a post? This conversation was taking place in a hypothetical future where Israel is cut off from international trade and aid due to their genocide of the Palestinians - there wouldn't be any Gazans left to celebrate. We're discussing a worst case scenario, because my original point was that committing acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing is a terrible idea for Israel because it doesn't have the geography or natural resources in order to survive a future where it has lost the support of the US and other western allies.
For the record, my actual fantasy is that both sides put down the weapons and come together in peace after the people responsible for the crimes on both side are prosecuted (and no, children who were born after the last election are not responsible for the crimes of their government).
Frothing genocide? I'm not proposing any kind of genocide at all - I'm saying that Israel would fall apart if it became a pariah state, which is very different. A pariah state cut off from the rest of the world and surrounded by people who violently hate them, with a population it cannot support with domestic agricultural output alone and a military it cannot maintain without access to international supply chains is not long for this world.
Moreover, as mentioned previously, a lot of the Israelis would simply just leave because grinding poverty in the desert is not a particularly tempting option when you have a passport that will take you to the first world - not to mention that unless you do become a refugee in this case you are overtly supporting a state that just committed ethnocide (which tends to put a dampener on people's sympathies for you).
Aside from clarifying that this would not actually be a retributive genocide, nor would I be able to take credit for it, who knows? It depends on how thoroughly the Israelis exterminated the Palestinians in this hypothetical future, and exactly what knocks the Israeli state out in the end. Ideally the Palestinian Christians, Muslims and Jews would be able to live together in peace.
Also, you seem remarkably hostile here - I'm not trying to score points, but it seems like you're getting unreasonably angry about this topic. Just to reiterate, this conversation is in the context of a future where Israel becomes a pariah state after committing horrific crimes against humanity. This isn't a conversation about whether Israel deserves to exist or the moral righteousness of the Zionist cause(though I'm sure you'd disagree with me there). The question is whether Israel can survive after being cut off from the rest of the world - and if you want to argue against that idea, you need to bring arguments like "They'd be able to source food from x because y, and they'd be able to get the rare earth metals required for their missiles from z" rather than just moral preening.
I am not a moderator.
Oh, I had not realized you meant genocide for real and not the way it's usually used in relation to Israel to describe a situation where populations don't actually ever decrease. This is often the problem with this expansion of terms. Although this is confusing because before you've alluded to Israel still being at war with some entity as their military protectionism being cut off was stated as some important thing. Is the west bank still in its current formation after this or are we imagining every Palestinian was genocided? Because it doesn't really seem lie any of Israel's other neighbors are exactly excited to get into a conflict with her. Are we proposing that like Arabs are blood lusted for the destruction of Israel like in those threads on super hero power scaling?
You're proposing the rest of the world commit a genocide by your own definition of blockading food imports. Or do you think what Israel is accused of doing doesn't count?
Up to half, almost certainly much fewer, could leave to the EU, although it's a weird kind of pariah state that you'd blockade food imports to but issue their citizens citizenship. but why would anyone accept refugees from this pariah state?
I'm not angry really. Maybe I've misread you but this all pattern matches to a frustrating trope of implying that those jews should just fuck back off to Europe which is a microcosm of a kind of third worldist flavored grievance politic that I find incredibly distasteful. Wakanda wish casting.
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
More options
Context Copy link
How? The houthis are on a completely different sea from the main israeli coast. It’s like saying alaskan separatist tribes are going to blockade the US.
How closely have you been paying attention to the region? This isn't speculation, this is a past event that has already bankrupted one of Israel's ports (Elilat), and the US donated a fighter jet to Poseidon's air force while trying to avoid their missiles (well that or it was just incompetence, which is the official story). There's even a wikipedia article on the topic (Red Sea Crisis).
Wiki says Eilat handled 2.6M tons a year; that would make it a little under 5% of their shipping, right? Is there a plan to extend that to the other 95%?
We're talking about a hypothetical future where Israel has become a pariah state. I don't think it is particularly unlikely that other nations in the region would conspire to interdict shipping, or that Iran/Russia would supply the houthis with enough long-rage ballistics to shut down all shipping to Israel regardless of distance.
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