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 -
Has anybody covered the whole proposed ceasefire situation at present on the Motte? Can't remember seeing it in last week's thread
Well, here's a quick summary:
That's about where we are. Right now, all we know is that it's a 19-point proposal now and the question of frozen Russian assets has been dropped from it. Presumably, the most sensitive points (Donetsk oblast withdrawal and NATO (non-)membership) will be discussed between Zelensky and Trump.
The most likely outcome is that Trump is once again not able to get off Mr. Bones' Wild Ride: he can't force a ceasefire through but can't wash his hands of the war either. A few more Ukrainian towns are turned into rubble, let's meet again in three months.
Yes, either Zelensky will be successful in convincing Trump that completely unrealistic demands on Ukraine's behalf should be added, in which case Putin will reject it and the neocons will push Trump for more sanctions. Or Z fails and Trump has an excuse to finally bail and pull intel and support, dumping it on Europe. Either way the war continues and the outcome is the same, just the timeline changes.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Probably not going to happen. The European proposal is delusional. The Russians probably don’t have an actual interest in ending the war at this point and their own proposal is only being made because they know that Ukraine will refuse.
Why is it delusional? What I mean is, what has the state of the war to do with Europe's willingness to concede anything? Say countless Ukrainians are dead, and the Ukrainians are nearing collapse. Not Europe's problem. I wouldn't even give russia a guarantee that Ukraine not join nato. All the pressure is on ukraine, and russia. Europe will just go along with ukraine’s decision. All the leverage europe has over russia (sanctions, confiscated assets) has been gifted to ukraine, to do with as they please. I have no idea why everyone acts like europe is the one who gets to decide to keep fighting.
It is Europe’s problem, or at least they feel it is. That’s why they got involved in the first place. There’s a big strategic difference between Russia controlling Donbas, and Russia controlling Ukraine all the way to the Polish border.
But why?
Anyway, the I don’t think Europe was thinking about this as logically as you are, I suspect they just don’t know how bad things really are.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
There was some discussion. I think the consensus was that it was a joke, and people were arguing over which side ought to take it seriously.
More discussion from last month. Personally, I think that analysis still holds.
There’s also the Transnational Thursday threads to consider.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link