site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 30, 2023

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.

13
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don't have first hand knowledge - I'm a fatass with over-protective PMC parents who wouldn't have dreamed of letting me join up - but I've never talked to an active duty military person or recent-vintage vet who made a big deal out of race issues. And I recall reading various pieces, books, etc. that claim that the military is good at turning racially- and culturally-disparate people all into good little green automata. But YMMV, and of course first-hand knowledge would be appreciated if anyone wants to chime in.

And I recall reading various pieces, books, etc. that claim that the military is good at turning racially- and culturally-disparate people all into good little green automata. But YMMV, and of course first-hand knowledge would be appreciated if anyone wants to chime in.

I admittedly bristle at being characterized as "good little green automata", but overall, I'd say this is accurate. The infamous line from Full Metal Jacket about how there is no bigotry in the Marine Corps because Marines treat everyone as being equally worthless, was pretty on point. For my part I used to tell my new recruits that "you're here because the US DoD considers you expendable". "Ethnic Tension" in the military happens more between branches and specialties than between races. Army vs Navy, Air Wingers vs Ops guys, Ops guys vs Grunts, and so on.

Though sadly, there seems to have been some efforts to change this in recent years all in the name of "reform" and increasing "inclusiveness". As someone who came up through and subsequently participated in the pipeline I find that latter bit rather galling. A major component of forging individuals into a unit, and breeding esprit de corps is fostering a sense of exclusiveness. You gotta earn those stripes.

No offense was intended, Hlynka -it was a poor choice of words. Thanks for your input.

It's all good. ;) It's not like I was particularly offended or anything.

Everyone I’ve talked to who was enlisted says the military was basically a continuation of high school with all the cliquishness, and although you’re right that racial tension is usually not part of the story there’s often an implication that the blacks mostly flock together, as they do in civilian life(and often other ethnically distinctive groups common in the military, like Puerto Ricans, Cajuns, etc), and that unit based loyalties are strongest for combat troops and usually don’t quite supplant ethnic or personal cliquishness outside of the infantry and special forces.

I served in a multi-ethnic non-US country as a reservist in the infantry. I can't remember any racial cliquishness either in boot camp or my unit. Basically everyone's race was 'green' and they were largely mission orientated.

Bootcamp at the time was identical for reservists and regulars, so when I went through we had mostly regulars with a minority of reservists. All of the infantry guys (before going through corps specific training) were switched on, but I remember a lot of the other enlisted guys being absolute idiots. I think they actually assigned people that tested higher to combat corps (with the exception of technical corps such as signals or intelligence).

Wouldn't surprise me if this had downstream impacts on interracial cohesion.