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.

Dreher apparently wrote an article that too specifically quoted Orbans thoughts. Supposedly it’s a bigger deal in Hungary but I believe there’s a few money quotes to discuss.

On Ukraine:

“To be clear, Viktor Orban doesn’t want the West to be in a war with Russia. But he says that far too many Westerners are deluding themselves about what’s really happening—and what could happen. . . .

Orban said that the West needs to understand that Putin cannot afford to lose, and will not lose, because he’s up for re-election next year, and he cannot run as the president who lost a war. What’s more, he said, Russia cannot allow NATO to establish a presence in Ukraine. The time has long passed when Russia might have been able to conquer Ukraine, or install a friendly regime. Had Russia won a quick victory, that might have been possible, but it’s hopeless now. Therefore, said Orban, Russia’s goal is to make Ukraine an ungovernable wreck, so the West cannot claim it as a prize. At this, they have already succeeded.”

On Ukraine I 100% the west, specifically NATO and the US, is at war with Russia. I often see the criticism from critics of the war that we do not understand this point. We do. It’s just in the modern world country’s don’t officially declare war. Russia did not. Nato did not. Perhaps it gives you cover for peace or something to not say it directly, but for whatever reason war is not called war. I agree Putin probably can’t lose the war or he’s out of office and perhaps a sacrificial lamb for the next dude. Disagree Russia had any strategic fear of NATO. 100% agree a fear of EU in Russia was justified as the western cultural umbrella would spread easier which he didn’t mention but culture war I’ve always believed was far stronger than any military war. Think Putin could have won the war earlier with better planning by crushing the military in the east first. But they had bad intel. Now the west is invested so theirs no way for Putin to win so his only play I guess is to make Ukraine in the east depopulated. Perhaps that’s not losing at a high costs.

On EU:

“Someone asked the prime minister if he wanted Hungary to stay in the EU. “Definitely not!” he said, adding that Hungary has no choice, because 85 percent of its exports are within the EU.”

This is true everywhere. Our wealth is thru trade. The old meme - the right can just invent their own twitter, their own internet, their own payment system…….Everything is interconnected and dependent on others. Centralized services have better economies of scale. Hungary due to geography can only be wealthy by becoming interconnected in the EU. Some businesses more constant costs businesses do not have these factors - farming, light manufacturing, etc (mostly right dominated industries). The lefts conquered all the industries that scale or have strong network effects. And that’s where the culture war fight has come from of trying to not be dominated.

https://www.thebulwark.com/how-rod-dreher-caused-an-international-scandal-in-eastern-europe/

Disagree Russia had any strategic fear of NATO.

I find it really curious how it's hard for you to believe this rather than Putin being afraid that his kids will turn gay and do the nae nae on tiktok (aka the culture war).

The Russian ruling class are made of westophiles. All of them own(ed) properties in the West. They send(t) their kids to study at Western institutions. Their wives start(ed) designer brands to try to buy their way into Paris fashion week, and host(ed) museum installations to get clout. They enjoy(ed) traveling to Davos on their private jet every year to mingle with all the western thought leaders.

All the cultural anti-west rhetoric is just for show. The culture was already getting watered down by the western influence to the point where American pop/hip hop future stars would cultivate cult-like fanbases in Russia early on in their careers before getting any recognition on their own turf.

Putin and everyone around him don't give a fuck about the culture war. Putin loved the west. Hell, he even idolized Bush Jr. in 2003.

NT: How is Putin coming in in 2003?

Putin appears to be maneuvering. He is now dependent on his inner circle and does not trust them. Yes, an artist is born. There was also such a factor as the idolizing of U.S. President Bush Jr. One of the elements that swept Putin into the empire was the fact that he found himself in the club of world leaders. And which ones! Chirac, Tony Blair, Schroeder, Bush. That was a stronger team than the ones we have today. Although there was also a downward trend in that level. Source - Gleb Pavlovskiy, advisor to Putin from 1996 to 2011

Putin desperately wanted 'in'. He wanted Russia to be accepted into 'the West' (or I should say NATO). Not as another vassal, but as a peer (Source).

So here's my interpretation of Putin's POV. Institutions that were created solely to contrast USSR militarily don't disappear after USSR's collapse. They don't want to include you as a peer. They also start expanding. Does that justify being fearful about it? You tell me

  1. Why be fearful? What exactly is the fear?

  2. If you are fearful, how does invading Ukraine help? It only makes NATO stronger. Is Russia more secure now?

Why be fearful? What exactly is the fear?

A military alliance set up specifically to contrast you comes closer and closer to your borders while taking over your sphere of influence and completely ignoring your voicing of concerns. Would US be ok with Mexico or Canada seeking closer military ties with China? Hell, let's not even go that far. What if China starts forming military partnerships with SK or Japan, how would US react? You know the answer.

If you are fearful, how does invading Ukraine help?

It doesn't. I have multiple theories why that happened, but I'm too lazy to write out a full thesis. In short: It was getting clear Ukraine is not gonna budge on staying neutral (not abiding by Minsk agreements, pro-peace politicians in Ukraine being pressured by pro-war factions to not back down, US getting more involved into Donbas conflict as time went on), so it was a now or never situation for Putin if he wanted to hold any influence over countries around Russia's borders. I doubt the war we have now was planned - analysts, even Western ones, didn't predict Ukraine would hold off that long. Also think Putin didn't expect EU to get as involved as it did. US's involvement was expected, but it wouldn't be able to do much if Germany or France lobbied against involvement within EU.

  1. One of the many justified fears could have been of something like what is happening right now: Russia feels compelled to enforce its interests militarily in a third country, but NATO uses its proximity to prevent it from doing so (by backing said country with equipment and intel, easily conveyed across shared borders and gathered with AWACS with range measured in the hundreds of kilometres).

    If Ukraine had actually joined NATO, this would obviously have been even worse: Russia clearly has interests in Ukraine (ranging from trade access, which was a core contention behind the 2014 revolution, via transit of petroleum products to Western Europe, where Ukraine stealing some portion was an issue decades before that, to the political implications of having a large neighbouring russophone country that might provide a safe harbour to opposition and subversives), which it would then have become impossible to enforce.

  2. They presumably didn't invade expecting to fail this hard. Had they won, at least Western commentators seemed to have been of the opinion that NATO would have been weakened (as its Eastern fringe would be more incentivised to hedge its bets between the US and Russia).