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 -
You confuse what you would like European leadership to do with what they want to do, and conclude that they can't do it.
The fact that Putin "can't" deal with Ramzan Kadyrov setting up a Muslim mini-theocracy within Russia's borders, or raise TFR, or any other number of things hasn't stoppsed him from sending hundreds of thousands to war. This is not a wargame, and failing to uphold one of the "basics of finctioning nation-states" does not magically deactivate all the other options a state has.
If you see a practical way of Europe challenging the US, by all means outline it. Putin pays his soldiers, is Europe supposed to do the same while maintaining it's welfare state, or do you think we're likely to ditch it? Where is their ammo coming from? We literally ran out of bombs when ousting Gaddafi. Do you think we'll be as good as the Americans at logistics, and we'll be able to project our power all the way to Greenland well enough to give the Americans a run for their money?
The only way for Europe to truly challenge America right now is to drop Ukraine, make big overtures toward Russia, get closer to China (nuclear option would be lifting ASML export restrictions to the PRC, since no US company can compete with them). Then Trump is in an unenviable position. He can wield the might of the US financial system to try to destroy the European and Chinese economies but that’s an extremely high variance play that would unite the US’ main geopolitical competitors in a way that could destroy dollar hegemony.
If he wants Greenland, instead of the current fumbling, he can just threaten Novo exports until the Danes agree to a referendum, then bribe the natives. Alas, that would require a somewhat more intentional foreign policy.
ASML play is complicated. It depends on American IP and suppliers, like Cymer for light source. Nevertheless, just a month ago Macron did hint at something very close to that, and the Chinese are working on the entire stack, so…
I hope Trump chases Europeans into a corner where they start considering live player options, options their Atlanticist handlers won't greenlight.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link