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 original purpose of NATO was to counter USSR, not Russia. There was no country called 'Russia' in 1949 when it was created.
Ukraine is going to be an economic and demographic shithole after this is over and the EU is stuck being dependent on US for at least the next half a century. Is that the price worth paying for not accepting Russia into NATO and acknowledging its interests? Why am I even asking, for a pole it for sure is.
I have. Have you? Here's words directly from horse's mouth.
There is no country called America or Britain. Proper names are for tombstones.
The USSR was the successor state of the Russian Empire for a reason, and Russia was the successor state of the USSR for a reason too. These were all Russian-dominated states.
Moreover, from the perspective of people like the Poles, the USSR was the Russian Empire + communism.
More options
Context Copy link
I will happily admit that yes, whether I or my family or my nation will be oppressed by Russia means to me more than X million dead in second Congo civil war or gas price.
Second, I am fine with "acknowledging its interests" - and then countering where interests diverge from ours.
Third, no idea why you think that accepting Russia into NATO would help. They would still do the same, and would make harder to counter them.
More options
Context Copy link
As far as geopolitics are concerned there is a clear succession from Grand Duchy of Moscow, Tsardom of Russia, Russian Empire, Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic, USSR and Russian Federation.
I use Russia to refer to imperialist, aggressive and problematic country that used to be named USSR and after it got less powerful and lost ability to occupy part of invaded areas rebranded itself to Russian Federation.
Have you noticed "George Robertson recalls Russian president did not want to wait in line with ‘countries that don’t matter’" line? Exactly the first sentence of the article and clearly presenting that Russia was not ready to get rid of primary problem - its imperialistic ambitions.
And even if we assume that ‘countries that don’t matter’ is misinterpretation and "did not want to wait in line" is understandable... Then "did not want his country to have to go through the usual application process" from the first paragraph below photo is not at all.
Germany managed to give up militaristic imperial ambitions, hopefully Russia will crash and burn during current war enough to do the same and without selling their nukes to Iran or something.
Russia was not ready to be an equal partner, see above.
I think that's a very flattering way to describe what happened which obscures why it won't happen for Russia and China.
Germany and Japan didn't so much give up imperial ambitions as they were ripped from their cold, nearly dead hands and then faced significant occupation and social engineering (especially in Germany)
As a nuclear power, this is impossible for Russia. If it isn't then - as you yourself worry - something has gone horribly wrong and it probably won't be to our benefit.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Which perspective are you taking here, EU or US? Because the arguments are not interchangeable. One can argue that from a US perspective, eastern europe is far away and unimportant and should be granted to russia for cheap. Otoh, for western europe, it's their backyard, their strategic sphere of influence. That euphemism of 'acknowledging russian interests', a russian geopolitical triumph would really mean brutal vassalage for eastern europeans, and partial finlandization for the stronger/further away european states. Avoiding that fate is definitely worth a lot of damage and some dependence on the US for western europeans. As to poles and ukrainians, understandably they are not keen on their countries being handed over because americans think they are too far away.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link