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 -
Well what exactly in the evidence shows that this is not a "fog of war" incident?
Ok, let me see if I understand your argument now:
Some number of prominent Israelis have drawn parallels between Israel and the Nazis.
One former member of the Israeli parliament has called for the complete removal of non-Jews from Gaza.
Therefore, the Israeli government internally, believes that what they are doing is on the same level as what Hitler did to the jews in Germany.
Do I have you correctly?
Also, if I could find a few current or former members of the US Congress who publicly characterized or advocated for US Policy in some respect, would you agree that according to your logic, it follows that this is an accurate characterization of US policy?
Why exactly? Seriously, why do you hold that it's reasonable to make such an association? Is it just a feeling, or is there a specific argument?
Well do you agree that Hamas uses human shields? Also, do you happen to know what percentage of those killed by the IDF in Gaza were civilians?
So you believe that former MK Feiglin's statements represent the official policy of the Israeli government?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_internment_camps
Given that Israel's behavior in Gaza has been exemplary for a nation at war, this is an easy comparison to make.
Ok, just so we are clear, your position is that in terms of war crimes; human rights abuses; and the like, in terms of activities over the past 10 years, Israel is the very worst country in the entire world (limiting the comparison to countries recognized in some fashion by the United Nations).
Do I have you right?
If you think that there is any way in which that incident could be described as due to the fog of war you are not a serious person attempting to have a meaningful conversation. I'm not going to bother responding to the rest of your points until you can explain to me exactly how the "fog of war" could explain what happened to Hind Rajab, because you're either too stupid to engage in a conversation like this or arguing in bad faith.
I would have to disagree. In wars, civilians get killed all the time by armies that are scrupulously following the rules of war.
I asked you to summarize the best evidence in support of your position and you used the "thick book" tactic. i.e. you linked to a lengthy article and, upon polite request, refused to point out where in this article the supposed evidence in support of your position is.
We both know the reason for this: In fact there is no evidence in the article which supports your position.
Since you won't answer my questions, I will answer them for you:
Answer: Yes, in your view, the stated views of the most radical Israelis can be and must be exaggerated and then imputed to the government as a whole.
2, Also, if I could find a few current or former members of the US Congress who publicly characterized or advocated for US Policy in some respect, would you agree that according to your logic, it follows that this is an accurate characterization of US policy?
Answer: Probably you won't concede that, because you have one standard for Israel and another standard for countries you don't hate. With Israel, the statement of a former member of parliament, one who is condemned widely in Israeli society, can still be imputed to the entire current government. With other countries, not so much.
Answer: It's just a feeling based on your hatred of Israel. With no other country would you take the actions of a few random citizens and insist that their behavior represents government policy.
Answer: No you won't, even though the evidence is overwhelming that they do so as a matter of their own policy. Because to do so would be to concede the likelihood that civilian deaths in Gaza are not due to genocidal intent on the part of Israel but rather the misbehavior of Hamas.
Answer: Yes, because you believe that with Israel the statements of all current and former parliament members, no matter how widely condemned, can be imputed to the government as a whole.
Answer: Yes, that's what you believe but you are reluctant to say it because deep down you know it makes you look ridiculous to make such a claim.
You have no idea what my positions are and telling other people what they believe is to the best of my knowledge explicitly against the rules on this forum - I'm not going to report you or anything, but I am going to refrain from replying to you any further on this thread.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link