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 -
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.
Israel is violently hated by every single one of its regional neighbours that isn't ruled by an Israeli client regime. I don't think it is particularly far-fetched to suppose that they would actively and pre-emptively attack Iran or Lebanon anyway, especially seeing as how they have actually already done that. Their security environment is extremely dangerous and hostile - war could come from practically every single direction.
Just look at what Israel has done in the region. When you blow up a bunch of children's hands with your cool pager stunt, do you think those children are going to grow up and be strong supporters of your government? When the 12 year old girl they killed in the pager operation's family went to her funeral, they wearing brand new Hezbollah gear. Nobody in the region likes Israel - they either fear Israel and the US or they simply accept Israeli/US money to play nice. If the IDF packed it up tomorrow and joined the Rainbow Family, they have already sown a bumper crop of blood vengeance oaths in the communities around them.
Of course, that's leaving aside the geopolitical aspects - Israel is an outpost of the US empire, an empire which is currently failing and losing its ability to exert control over the rest of the world. Why would China and Russia, when given the chance, not turn Israel into a gigantic blood-and-treasure hole for the US empire (more than it already is) at the cost of giving the arabs a bunch of weapons?
I think there's a big difference between blocking food imports, sniping people who go out to fish, purposefully inducing a famine etc. and being such a widely reviled state that nobody wants to sell their food to you. Do you see a difference between locking someone else's child in your basement dungeon and starving them to death as opposed to a child murderer realising that nobody wants to sell them food?
But more importantly, what's the point of bringing morality into this? It was morally wrong for Israel to do what it did to Gaza, but that didn't prevent them from doing it. I'm not saying that it will be a good thing when Israel is unable to support its population but that when it is cut off from international trade flows it will not be able to support its population. Again, an argument against this position would be something along the lines of pointing out that they'd be able to use x farming techniques or y technological solution to fertiliser and soil quality issues.
I imagine that as long as they weren't active participants in ethnic cleansing or had a demonstrated record of opposition to it (like those who refused to join the IDF) they'd be welcomed with open arms. But you are right - a lot of them wouldn't be accepted as refugees, especially those who enthusiastically supported crimes against humanity or shot children for trying to retrieve the corpses of their family members. This would be a big problem, and I'm honestly not sure there's a happy outcome for anybody involved. The organisations that would be the Nazi-hunters of this future are making lists and recording details right now, like the Hind Rajab foundation - which is already responsible for many nations being incredibly unwelcome to IDF soldiers.
In my heart of hearts think that the Israelis should go back to where they came from, and those who cannot should be integrated into a single state called Palestine - after rigorous prosecutions for warcrimes, crimes against humanity, regular crimes (you hear about the IDF pro rape protests?), etc. But I freely recognise and admit that my preferred outcome is extremely unlikely - which is why I'm not talking about what I want for Israel, but what I think the ultimate consequences of their current trajectory is.
How does Israel survive without access to global trade networks? How do they feed themselves? How do they resupply their interceptor missiles without outside help? How do they maintain their social cohesion when the huge cash infusions from the US which keep their society together and functional go away? These are all serious problems for the long-term stability of the nation and in this entire conversation nobody has presented a single serious proposal for how Israel would face those challenges in the absence of a supportive hegemon that can shower them with blood and treasure.
Maybe I'm the streets in a kind of lab Arab patriotism sense, but the surrounding leaders would probably breath a sigh of relief to be rid of hamas as a hub for the Islamic brotherhood. Your whole post hinges on a kind of pan Arab support that just doesn't seem to exist.
I think it would be hard to estimate what percentage of the Arab world ultimately would support VS oppose attacks on hezbollah. Certainly the coming Syrian regime will have no love lost for them backing Nashar. They've been behind the killing of hundred of thousands of Arabs themselves, does that not create martyrs against them or does only Israel make its enemies stronger when it kills them? Their number one supporter isn't even Arab, it's Iran and Iran is responsible for more Arab deaths than Israel by a very wide margin.
Is Israel somehow not being sent food and weapon shipments from the US while also being drained financially to do so?
OK yes, so the plan is that the Israelis are getting genocide one way or the other, got it. Yeah, I gotta be honest, I think almost all of them are going to hunker down in their nuclear state and play North Korea "we have the bomb and nothing left to lose" politics and probably come out of it fine. North Korea even gets food aid for its trouble.
But then really I think your whole premise is just flawed in thinking being a pariah state means you can trade for weapons and supplies. Israel managed to get enough weapons to win the six days war by trading with post soviet nations without any super power support. It's not like other genocidal nations struggle to find trading partners, turkey is in nato, Russia even finds trading partners in Europe as it invades one of their neighbors. Half the middle Eastern nations have committed at least an ethnic cleansing.
No? I'm assuming that the hand of the USA in the region is heavy and currently imposing peace on the leadership of those governments. How long does Egypt continue to support Israel when the USA stops paying them? I'm not asserting PAN ARAB UNITY (though the arabs do seem to come together, split apart, come together etc over longer periods of history) - just that there's currently a major world power spending lots of money to pacify the countries around Israel, and that those countries will be less pacified when that stops.
I was talking about the immediate family members of Israeli victims. It doesn't matter which of the many groups dedicated to destroying Israel that they join, just that they join them.
In this hypothetical the US/Israel relationship has been destroyed. That was given as an example as to how the relationship could be destroyed or why the US would want to withdraw from it. But I do find it entirely possible that a vengeful US could decide to prosecute Israel for AIPAC corruption and demand reparations for all the money sent there by politicians under the influence of an Israeli organisation like AIPAC. After all, they're operating as agents of a foreign government without being registered as such, so the idea of them actually getting prosecuted in the future isn't that far fetched.
Ok yes, so you're just a muslim hater who wants all the brown people to die. Please don't put words into my mouth or claim that I'm actually saying something I'm not - I believe telling someone what they believe is actually against the rules on this site. But for my actual objection to this claim anyway - the destruction of Nazi germany did not mean that the Germans were genocided. Presumably what would happen after the collapse of Israel is either a land-grab from the countries around them or the creation of a Palestinian state which the stateless Israeli survivors could become citizens of (after some intense denazification programs).
Who? Who are you talking about? What nation is going to be trading with Israel after they get cut off from the US? It isn't Russia, it isn't China. The only potential candidate I can think of is India, and they're going to have a lot of fun actually trading with Israel. I have been asking repeatedly for you to provide a specific example of who would actually be willing to do so and all you have are vague allusions to how other nations with completely different circumstances managed it. Again, if you're going to provide an example like this you need to actually explain the points of similarity and difference between those states. Russia being sanctioned by the US over Ukraine is such a completely different situation that you can't just make blanket allusions and go "she'll be right mate".
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link