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 reason Russia invaded Crimea was the new Ukrainian government was very strongly influenced by happily murderous (and partly nazi) nationalists and would have loved nothing more than to take over a piece of territory that's not only of prime strategic importance to Russians, but that is also very important historically. You can look it up why, or just ask chatGPT about what exactly Crimea was up to before it became Russian. They don't teach you that at your schools, I'm sure.
So please don't act like a leftist who is permanently obtuse.
It's a war of 'denazification', not conquest. Once foreign expansionists and their puppets are removed from power, the rest of Ukraine can keep on being Ukrainian. And yeah, Russians are taking the parts of Ukraine that are historically Russian. You think Ukrainians should be left unpunished for their stupid decisions of deciding to act as proxies for the enemies of Russia?
You seem to lack a theory of mind, so perhaps try to imagine Chinese doing a color revolution in Canada, the victorious revolutionaries installing a government that's half Chinese and then signing a defence pact with China that promises PLA bases on the Great Lakes and both seaboards within a few years. Now that you have imagined it, how does that make you feel, and more importantly, do you really think the US military would be willing to just let it happen? Mhmm?
You're allowed to echo Russian talking points, but you still need to engage civilly.
This is not civil. Stop it.
Okay. I'll try.
I don't believe Americans would consider it legitimate or let it go if Chinese-supported popular and quite violent discontent led to a regime change in Canada or Mexico, Dominican Republic and probably any place in the western hemisphere. They don't even consider it legitimate if Chinese win MP seats in Canada with deniable Chinese government support, even though, US itself supports a gigantic amount of deniable political activity around the globe via various means government institutions formed for that express purpose, such as NED, 'private' foundations closely tied to secret services or deep-pocketed sympathetic billionaires with ideas etc). They're otherwise fairly intelligent people, so the inability to see things from the POV of the other side is jarring.
I'll point it out next time without accusing anyone of being autistic.
More options
Context Copy link
If you're going to mod that comment for incivility, you need to call out the "Mhmm". Peak millennial snot filler word
I almost did, but it was more like a snotty conclusion to a crap post that by itself would just have been mildly obnoxious.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I genuinely do not understand why this hypothetical scenario keeps being used when a similar thing has already happened for realsies in Cold-War-Era Cuba. As we know from history, the US reacted with great hostility but did not actually end up doing anything resembling the current war; even the Bay of Pigs was basically a single instance of prodding without US ground troops. Furthermore, Russia has certainly never acted in a way indicating that it respects spheres of interest of the sort it claims for itself in post-Soviet territories regarding Cuba, consistently supporting Castro and opposing US sanctions and other procedures even after the fall of the Soviet Union.
a) They were ready to do so and the threat helped persuade Soviets.. American intelligence also noted in late '21 that Russia seems ready to invade Ukraine, yet strangely, that didn't help persuade anyone.
b) They didn't do that because USA and USSR made a deal - US removed IRBMs from Turkey and Soviets removed such from Cuba and refrained from putting any serious military there in the future. Although it looks like Soviets got something out of the deal, the missiles in Turkey were scheduled to be withdrawn anyway, so it was mostly just a retreat.
There was no negotiation with Russians over their demands this time (~ no non-domestic NATO troops in eastern Europe, no missiles, no more enlargement) this time. It was seen as an insult that Russians even voiced them.
Well, there you go. You have your answer why it's used as an analogy. Soviets, despite the earlier brazen attempt actually saw reason and stepped back when presented with threat of war. Americans, acting through proxies didn't, and kept on going with their salami tactic. (no enlargement, then 3 countries only, then 6, then color revolutions in Georgia, Belarus more ..etc).
What are you talking about. I remember reading how Cubans, on average, lost 20 lbs after USSR fell because trade cratered. He wasn't getting any 'consistent' support. Russia hasn't been propping up Cuba, and as to voting against sanctions, loads of countries do that. It's also not clear at all why Cuba needs to be sanctioned. When was the last time they tried exporting their revolution?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The Maidan protests happened because the people of Ukraine wanted to part of a rich, democratic and fair Europe and not the corrupt, colonialist dictatorship next door. That's not Nazism, that's common sense, unless you use the absurd definition of Nazism used by the Putin regime (to wit, Ukrainians who don't want to be Russians are Nazis).
What are you talking about? Crimea was already part of Ukraine and had been for decades. How could Russian annexation prevent it being 'taken over' by the country it is already part of?
Which is exactly the kind of revanchist militarism that I described initially when talking about Russia's war aims. Nothing to do with 'Ukraine not being a US proxy'.
Nope. Putin was very clear about what the purpose of the invasion was in his accidentally leaked victory speech. It was explicitly about the elimination of Ukraine as a distinct nation with a distinct identity.
In Putin's view, Ukrainians aren't real. They are actually 'little Russians' who have been mislead.
Crimea was made part of the Ukrainian SSR by the Russian regime in Moscow in 1954, the Russian-speaking East and South have been part of Ukraine since 1922, a century ago. The idea that Putin's quasi-genocidal war is somehow reasonable punishment for the decisions of past Russian regimes, or because Ukraine doesn't want to be the subject of its murderous neighbour, is morally abhorent.
As an aside, I have personally met some of these 'Russians' you talk about (i.e. Russian-speaking Ukrainians). I can assure you, they are not grateful that Putin has 'liberated them from Ukronazis' or whatever other propoganda seems to have taken hold in your mind. They despise the Russian regime because of the terror it has inflicted on their country and their families.
Me? Your the one ignoring Vladimir Putin's explicit statements about what he wants and why he wants it, and instead sanewashing what he himself admits is a revanchist war of conquest into a defensive action they forced into because naughty Ukraine wouldn't do what it is told.
Ukraine is a sovereign country and the Ukrainians are a people with preferences as legitimate as any other, if they want to cooperate with the US or Europe (and after seeing what Russia would end up doing, can you blame them?) they should be able to do that without the dictator in the East being allowed to kill them in their sleep.
The US didn't do the Maidan, the Ukrainians did it. Half a million in the capital alone. They did it because they recognised what being a Russian subject like Belarus would entail, and their predictions have been vindicated.
You're parroting insanely stupid propaganda. So far this is the least 'genocidal' war waged in Europe since.. probably the Prusso-French war. Civilian deaths are minimal.
And GWB decided he is going to declare 'war on terror' and yet curiously only went after Al-Qaeda. Please stop trying to say as if public statements by politicians are actually meaningful indications and not tailored for public consumption.
Also, if you get the homeless bum next door drunk, give him a rusty knife and tell him you'll give him $500 if he kills that pitbull, he then acts legitimately, out of his own initiative and him getting viciously mauled is totally not your fault.
Would you consider a Maidan in Washington that ended up abolishing the electoral college and handing blue cities total control of the country legitimate? No you wouldn't. So please stop with the double standards.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link