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 -
America is a pretty chauvinistic and patriotic country but tomorrow if news came out that negotiations were underway to sell American Samoa or Puerto Rico or Guam, most people would actually not care. You'd get some rally-round-the-flag rah-rah and maybe the other side would shout accusations of selling the country out. But by-and-large the average man on the street would not care unless there were some other scandal involved. These are not core parts of America, we don't have some fantastical attachment to every last inch our "sovereign territory" actually. I can say this relatively confidently because nobody cared when the Philippines went, even though we fought a huge war to acquire it, nobody even noticed, it's a barroom trivia question now at best. Ryukyu Islands were American until 1972. Nobody cares.
So you want to tell me that maybe the politicians could negotiate, but the Danish voters can't possibly have that, and it's the most rational thing in the world. -- ? Why? What does the average Dane actually care about Greenland? Is it a core part of their nationhood? Do they all vacation in Greenland? Fond memories as boys? Does everyone in Denmark have Greenlandic friends, relatives, wives? Is Greenland a point of pride in Danish TV shows and media? Does Greenland form a core part of Denmark's economy? Greenlandic basketball star? Modeling agency? Because it seems like none of that is the case. As far as I can tell, nobody really thinks about Greenland at all, has nothing to do with it. The Danes committed a sterilization campaign there within recent memory. They could barely spare it a thought for defense during World War II, when the Americans had to step in before the Nazis did. So the fanatical Danish attachment to Greenland is based on... what, exactly? Can I not notice that this is extremely irrational?
Because from the beginning even before Trump made threats and boasts the Danes refused to even consider trading Greenland. Why? Is it beyond the pale? Is the ability of Greenlanders to sell technology and land to the Chinese an inviolable human right? Because all that seems to be left is that it's "bits of our continent" as if that settles the matter, it's theirs so we can't have it out of some exaggerated pride. Wailing about how they've been such a good boy and they don't deserve this. Threatening to blow it all up if they don't get their way. ???
A rational Danish leader would say, "well, it's a little goofy, but the Americans are a rich country, we're willing to hear them out as long as the rights of the Greenlanders are respected." The Americans would say, "$100 Billion," or whatever. The Danish public would say, wow, that's a lot of money, we can use this to make Denmark a better place. The Greenlanders would say, "Thanks, hm, we're not so sure but these are our demands." It would be easy and technical, like when the Danes sold us what are now the US Virgin Islands. Did they cry then and wail and complain that we were violating their core territorial sovereignty and stealing their continent? No, it was totally unimportant because nobody cares.
Maybe Greenland really is important to the Danes, but every time I ask I get drivel about human dignity and what good allies they've been. Since it can't be explained it seems totally irrational. Well, we have a pretty good model for this already, and you can groan as I repeat myself for the hundredth time, but, yes, say it with me, it looks like TDS. Trump wants Greenland, it's monarchical, it's what Hitler would do, America can't have Greenland it's about our dignity! Yeah, ok, sure, yeah, ok, whatever you say man.
Greenland is fairly important to Denmark and Danish politics, isn't? It was the topic of an entire season of Borgen in which Greenland-related issues nearly bring down the government. And in terms of population fraction it would be closer to the US selling off Mississipi than the smaller and more recently acquired American Samoa.
I'm not sure I buy this cool, businesslike approach that Americans would allegedly have to the selling of territory, especially if to a larger country, when we already know that isn't Trump's attitude to the buying of territory; he was hot and bothered and mooted military force when denied a negotiation. Your position seems to be "Yes but he never would have had to use aggression if they just did the rational thing and agreed to a negotiation, so really it's their own fault." Doesn't sound like how allies talk to me.
Denmark agreed to let Greenland leave Denmark if it wanted (and it does, in fact, want, as I understand it). So it's pretty clear that however important it is in Danish politics it's being part of Denmark is very negotiable.
Isn't it much more polite (to Denmark) to offer to buy Greenland than to offer Greenland $5 billion to leave? In which case the Danes get nothing.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link