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 -
I am actually Chinese and China is nowhere as great as you think it is. 99% of what is written about China in English is narrative and lies, and about 85% of Chinese-language content about China is the same. So if you are a foreigner making your opinion on China's tightly controlled PR vs the open media of the West that has its laundry hanged out to dry, and siding with China, you're just as foolish as the pro-Soviet boosters in the NYT who didn't see the Holodomor.
I seem to recall one of our own being unfairly profiled as Israeli agent, but at this point, I have to ask. Are you an agent of the People's Republic of China, or have any relation to a corporation that does extensive business with them? Or are you some variant of Maoist Third Worldist?
Note that there's nothing wrong with being any of those things, but the pretense of being a neutral observer chuffing about American degeneracy is wearing thin. Please explain why you believe the communists in China are more trustworthy partners that the Americans.
Is it really that weird why there's now a certain amount of speculation about whether it would be wise for EU (or Canada) to move at least a bit towards China?
What is prized in global politics is consistency and predictability. China is extremely predictable. The outlines of its foreign policy have been the same at least since the end of Cold War. When Xi took over, nobody seriously entertained the possibility that he'd do something different in this sphere than his predecessors, which he indeed hasn't done. When he relinquishes his position, his successor will do the same. His rhetoric matches what his country does. What China does may be annoying (going bonkers if someone caters to Dalai Lama or Taiwan) or hostile (espionage, support to Russia), but these can be priced in and accounted for.
Trump is inconsistent and unpredictable, both regarding his own previous actions and the policy lines of the previous presidents. While America's foreign policy largely the same, there are now new elements (who could have guessed that the idea of military intervention to seize another NATO member's territory would have even been on the table?) to account for. These wild scenarios probably won't take place, but they might - Trump's rhetoric doesn't match what his country does, expect when it does. What's more, there's a general feeling that Trumpists seriously believe in Trump Year Zero, that Trump is so special and so different that his election means America can just junk all of its previous commitments (made by worse cucked presidents who are not Trump and thus are not as legitimate as he is), which just increases the unpredictability. What will Trump do with, say, Russia? In the end, who knows? He probably doesn't even know himself right now what he will do in the end.
I think that one of the reasons for the TACO narrative is less that it's a burn on Trump (though it plays a part) and more that it's a narrative that attempts to assert at least some normalcy and consistency to this maelstorm. However, a problem is that now that the narrative itself is at play, there's a risk that it bugs Trump enough that he stops chickening out.
I can understand it, but there is a considerable risk from switching from a flawed democracy as a master to an autocratic communist state. If the Europeans or Canada are complaining about human rights and authoritarianism, then taking China as a master is not an improvement.
Might be helpful to articulate your major concerns with our glorious motherland. Autocratic? Yeah sure. Backward and broke? Depending on who you compare us to. Culturally barren? Pretty much but I think it could get better. Constantly sitting in the cuck chair? Couldn't agree more. Communist? Unless you're specific types of deranged people (by that I mean both the 粉红 and the 反贼), it's feels unserious.
You could write a book about it, but let me condense my concerns into three points.
A) Gross materialism and an obsession with wealth. If you think Americans are disgusting in greed and consumerism, they have nothing on the Chinese. You would think that a communist state would have a more egalitarian ethos, but mainlanders judge very sharply on money and class. When you obliterate traditional mores and religion, what you are left with is a class of hustlers who have no shame or dignity.
B) Placing face over truth. Nearly all Eastern cultures have this to some extent, but China will never foster an intellectual or artistic scene that is worth a damn if the powers that be only allow critique for the purpose of internal power struggle. When you embrace lying to preserve the reputation of your superiors, you move away from the Enlightenment and sink into oriental despotism.
C) Destroying the environment. I'm not a green, but poisoning the water table, scouring the oceans clean of life, and pumping unfiltered toxins into the air is not a sign of a rational or scientific government. This casual disregard for their own stewardship extends to the people as well (baby formula being the most significant, but SARS and COVID are there, too.)
All of these things are bad, and will destroy China if allowed to continue unabated, but the party has shown no signs of even recognizing that these are problems.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I'm not really even talking about choosing masters, just that the current chaos in DC makes China look at least a bit more appealing than previously.
One of the huge risks involved in China is, of course, that if it decided to fundamentally and decisively to alter its tack (restore doctrinaire Marxism-Leninism and go for global revolution, say), it would be that much more fateful for everyone else. Nevertheless, insofar it is in America's interests to prevent this for happening, it's currently dropping the ball.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Simple, because they are much weaker. Any third country can expect far less demands from China than they would from America. Europe must buy time to wean itself off its dependence on American tech, military supplies and energy, that can only be done through good relations with Russia and China.
How quickly they forget. This also has implications for AI*; if we're going to put all our eggs in one basket, then any problems with the basket will be very severe indeed.
"Hello, you buy all your stuff off us and are trying to sell us as much of your stuff as possible. Better keep us sweet!"
What does that have to do with political demands? At the very least Chinese supply chains are only disrupted by external shocks, whereas as America is weaponizing trade to make demands.
China's recent rare earth policy suggests strongly otherwise.
After the 200% tariff. China did not start this trade war.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I am glad you are able to reassure us that it's only external shocks and will never ever be weaponised trade. How very civilised of the Chinese to refrain from exercising power!
I would rather have Europe’s access to plastic toys weaponized than it’s access to microsoft, cloud services, and the reserve currency of the planet. Eventually you will of course have to add AI to the list of services that Europe depends on, and that can be shut off in an instant because all the major players in that sector are American. Dependence on American services, technology and hardware is embedded in every level of European society and even the military, developing alternatives will take decades of sustained work during which China will simply not be the greater problem.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Well, if you're European, there's zero chance of being invaded by China, while there's a non zero chance of being invaded by the US.
There's a nonzero chance of being invaded by Russia with participation of Chinese troops.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
No. You admit being Canadian, perhaps of Chinese ethnicity. Maybe a Taiwanese or a Hong Konger at that, given how you specify not getting into fights with «Mainland» Chinese here. And I do not know when you've last been to Mainland China and how long you've lived in Canada, but you write like an Indian, with the over-the-top emotive rhetorical flourish and confident pride in your eloquence that I have never seen a Mainland-educated person display in English (then again I could be accused of much the same). You might even believe this alone makes you better than them, you assimilated so well after all, and the Chinese are known for strong internal racism. However, I'll allow that you're probably a first-generation immigrant, seeing as how you attack fellow immigrants and give them this boomerish no-nonsense advice on fitting in. You are also not particularly informed about the conditions of either American or Chinese economy, given that we've seen a spectacular refutation of your June thesis («The American economy is not dependent on imports from China») here with the October MOFCOM Surprise that forced the US into a humiliating climbdown. I'd say >5 years since last stay in China. Right? The idea I'm seeing among people routinely doing business with China, the knowledge of Chinese way of life is completely obsolete within about 5 years.
More generally, I put extremely little faith in «I'm from X and here's the ugly truth» type takes, ironic as that is, given that I'm sometimes providing such opinions on Russia. Many people are dissatisfied in the condition of their nation; those are the Russians saying they're inept orcs and the frontline will crumble in two weeks, the Americans complaining of their intolerable wage slavery to the middle-class Shanghainese on Rednote, and of course the Chinese who've internalized the more charismatic white narrative about their inferiority, or just grew dismayed of the grift and striverism. But many Chinese including my friends in various walks of life and in different countries hold views opposite to yours; and many Chinese outside China are straightforwardly coping, starting with their patron saint Gordon Chang and the COVID refugee cohort that had accepted a permanent QoL hit in emigration and thus sustains itself with news of the coming Chinese collapse. Whereas most Chinese dissidents, in my experience, are straight up mentally ill (excluding eg. Ai Weiwei), and there's no talking to them. I've visited a local Falun Dafa branch, the food was okay, but my takeaway was «wow, if the MSS ran this thing, they'd find little to improve for the purposes of lulling the US into complacency». That's the nervous system of the overseas anti-CCP Chinese and much of the Western conservative media, their newspapers informing Republican policymaking – a hive of loudly insane religious freaks who couldn't cut it in China. It had put some things into perspective for me.
It's also quite condescending to assume that a foreigner, one from a former Communist country at that, is naively engaging with «tightly controlled PR». Your homeland's PR is hilariously tone-deaf and transparent; if the MSS or whatever were employing people like me, they'd get much further, but they treat propaganda as a sinecure for officials' failsons. My opinion is based on primary sources, not on «PR». I can literally see who's doing what, with what dependencies, with what labor, and the Chinese are doing about 50% of the interesting stuff in the world, delivering us the world that's moving forward twice as fast.
Mainly because the average quality of Americans and the Chinese doesn't matter so much – institutions that serve as the bottlenecks do. The CCP imposes some standards of competence and prosociality, as opposed to the American beauty pageant, and Xi in particular is like 3 standard deviations above Trump in personal integrity, which has effects downstream. Xi's ministers are humans, Trump's are weird hypebeasts; Xi's policies are motivated by long-term rational self-interests, Trump's by petty cruelty and delusions, therefore the Chinese in aggregate become more predictable and more reliable partners. This is trivially obvious to a neutral observer from going through their biographies and watching their actions, and actions of both countries, for several years.
If I were a Maoist Third Worldist, I would not be saying that China is not really Communist.
As an actual Chinese I can tell you for sure that my Chinese-ness is not dependant on the papers I have or the country I live in, and having an outsider tell me I'm not is hilarious. I'm not a Changstan or a weird cultist, either, but having a foreigner lecture me on my own ethnic homeland is rich. You think you know things but you really don't. Sinophillic russian you may be, you want to believe the best of China to grind an axe against the west. You will be disappointed, in the end.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link