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 -
Being opposed to the war is not treason. Treason would be something like assisting Iran. It's conceivably possible that a congressman might do this, but it probably looks more like Bob Menendez-type behavior than a political stunt.
As far as democrats' political behavior, this is pretty normal for late-stage republics. Iran can't really hurt us that much; obviously attacking them was dumb, but we're kind of committed now. The real question is 'is the local allies part of the plan going to work'. I don't have the highest hopes, but Iran is kind of falling apart right now.
I feel like my point was missed by the majority of posters (which could easily be my fault).
The problem is not opposing the war, it's serving as opposition to the war effort, which some people are clearly doing.
You have a difference between not wanting to spend American lives in Vietnam and giving aid to the VC, or even just hoping that the VC win.
I mean I get the argument on pragmatic grounds, but in theory the political process (i.e. the democratic part of government) is specifically entrusted with deciding who to go to war against and how. So on that level it's nonsensical to say opposing (non-democratic!) decisions about going to war isn't or shouldn't be allowed.
In other words, there's an okay argument you can make that it would be nice if people supported the war effort even if they oppose the war, but upgrading that to people ought to support the war effort even if they oppose the war is an argument that's at least out of sync with the Constitution and our history. Morally sure, you can still say that, everyone can have their opinion.
More options
Context Copy link
Haven't all American wars had significant numbers serving as opposition to the war efforts? Even WWII? And riots in New York city against conscription during the Civil War? Is there something different with what's going on now that I'm not seeing?
Yeah, the near-unanimity. Or apparent near-unanimity, anyway. Everywhere I look the story is that the US cannot win this war, in fact is losing as we speak, and has hit nothing but civilian infrastructure, schools, and world heritage sites. That Iran's launch capability cannot be stopped, that their nuclear materials are being recovered as we speak, and that the US can do nothing about their nuclear program. That Iran can keep the Strait of Hormuz closed indefinitely and there's nothing the US can do about it, that the IRGC will remain in control and remain defiant, and that the question is not whether the Iranian regime can survive this war but whether the American one can.
Or maybe it's just CNN, X, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the LA Times, Reuters, AP, and The Wall Street Journal.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
An American joining a chant of "Death to America" probably isn't treason (but if the American knew the chant was organized by the hostile state, I could see it), but it's pretty bad nevertheless. This is getting pretty close to the line, assuming any of those people are actually American citizens. "Solidarity with Iran" is pretty bad in terms of "adhering to their enemies".
(Why can I find no mention of this in US media... including Fox? Maybe nobody at any of those agencies speaks Farsi)
It's probably not mentioned because at least going by the one picture, this is like 30 people. Size of protests matter. You can pretty easily get 30 people to show up at a protest over a pretty stupid issue, especially in NYC
More options
Context Copy link
That is protected 1st amendment speech. And who actually cares what those privileged mamma's boys say? Blow them off, tell them to their face's they're assholes, or punch them in the nose and take the consequences. But spoiled brats acting out suggests not at all that the FBI and Justice Department need to be involved because Western Civilization is about to collapse.
A DIA analysts secretly passing intel reports to Iran or their proxies would be treason. This isn't just not in that neighborhood, it's not even in the same zip code.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link