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 Europeans are the parents in this analogy in part because you (that is Europe) made us. We were amalgamation of Anglo, French, Dutch, and Spanish colonists before we became "The United States" and to some extant we still are. There is still a great deal of pride in that ancestry and a strong cultural affinity even today.
But pride and affinity don't pay the bills. You ask "how on earth are the Europeans the parents in this analogy" and then go on to take the parents side. Maybe it's my own experience sharing a family with addicts and alcoholics but I am much less inclined to simply dismiss the kids as "stupid" out of hand, and maybe that's why I feel the post is relevant.
Pointing out that Europe is a weak and unreliable ally who's values often clash with ours, and who is at this very moment actively funding the ongoing slaughter in Ukraine through their purchases of Russian energy and goods is not "abuse" it is an explanation.
You might not like what was said, or who said it, but that doesn't change the fact that you know the reason why many in the US are cooling towards Europe, but Just like the parents in that post you avoid acknowledging it.
To quote the closing monologue...
You are not understanding the problem. Talking to me like we‘re negotiating the amount of the „fair share“ I should pay to you, or what I need to do for Ukraine or in our internal politics to accomodate you .
No. Listen to what I‘m saying. You say you have affection for europeans, and I feel the same about americans, but we are beyond that now. Our relationship has been irreparably damaged by trump‘s threats and insults. I am not like trump – saying outrageous things as a negotiating anchor with the intention of backing down to a lower number, or macho trash-talking, empty bragging about my own strength. I mean what I say. I want to make it official that our alliance is cancelled, and americans out of europe.
You feel that I do not understand and I feel that you are not listening.
You say that our relationship has been irreparably damaged by trump‘s threats and insults. I would say that our relationship has been deteriorating a while now. Trump's "threats and insults" are not the cause of that damage, they are the effect of a relationship that was already critically damaged.
Europe, or rather Europe's leadership chose to cozy up to Russia and China while taking American friendship for granted, and they laughed at us when we tried to warn them of the dangers. Europe has flat-out told us on multiple occasions that they do not view us as friends and allies but as an economic resource. Recall that back in 2020 when when Congress was talking about closing US bases in Germany, the German government objected on the grounds that it would disrupt the local economies of cities like Rammstein and Stuttgart, not on grounds of security.
As a result, there is sincere doubt within the US about Europe's value as an ally. If Chinese missiles started raining down on US cities tomorrow would Europe cut themselves off from Chinese trade? If the last 5 years are any indication, the answer would appear to be no. Even if Europe were in a position to offer aid to the US in such circumstances (which is what all this talk about NATO readiness is really about) would there be the inclination? Again, if the last 5 years are any indication, the answer would appear to be no.
On China: You are right to doubt our commitment. Everything else aside, Trump‘s and his supporters‘ comments reek of hubris, jingoism and imperial sickness. And the last thing europe needs is to get sucked into a huge war against a formidable enemy like china because of american pride. So from a european perspective, the alliance is doing less and less for us, and the probability that it could cost us catastrophically keeps increasing.
Americans want a level of compensation (delian tribute, really) we‘re never going to give – because it‘s not like we‘d fall to russian conquest if you just leave ; post WWII yes, but the wolf isn‘t at the door anymore. A chihuaha perhaps, or a wounded pygmy bear – and a panda, but they‘re vegetarian, as far as we know.
Anyway, the question of „who was a bad ally first“ is all rear-view mirror stuff. Whoever „started the breakup“ is irrelevant, we agree the relationship is bad now, so let‘s just end it.
Then why is the entire European establishment apoplectic at the mere thought of Trump cutting support for Ukraine? Why is the argument against appeasement that Putin will just keep pushing west? If Russia is just a chihuahua, Europe should be able to handle the situation all on it's own.
Trump already did cut support for Ukraine?
Yes, europe will be able to handle russia on its own, easy. The politicians are largely dickless and slow to adapt to the new reality, starting with merz. But I think another, already pre-programmed, humiliating session of trump's retarded ideas and insults should do it. You could see european politicians' heads slowly emerging from the sand at Davos, before Trump backed down and Rutte kissed his ass again.
I was thinking more about actual hardware, rather than squabbles over who pays for it. You also seemed to have skipped over the other questions I asked.
They're detached from reality, and the problem is endemic to the entire elite class of Europe.
I think it's very relevant who pays for it. Paying for it is the act of an ally, selling that of a neutral. Refusing to sell is hostile, it's siding with Russia - and we haven't even officially ended our alliance yet.
I don't understand your other question, the argument against appeasement. I have neither desire nor need to appease Russia, none. They are evil and weak and getting weaker every day. They should get kicked harder, bleed some more. We should escalate.
I think it's even more relevant for the physical object that you want to buy to actually exist, and to have a willing seller.
The question was whether or not Europe can defend itself without the US, if the answer is "yes, as long as we're still allied" that doesn't actually answer the "without the US" part.
You said Russia is not a threat. If it's not a threat, than the argument "if we let them take Ukraine, they'll come for us next" makes absolutely no sense. You can say you don't want to give them Ukraine either way, which is fine, but the argument itself makes zero sense, and yet it was quite common for politicians to use it.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link