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 -
As a side note, this is untrue. J & S / WB belongs to Palestinian Arabs only in the sense that (1) the Arabs successfully ethnically cleansed Jews from the area in the 1930s and 1940s; and (2) under the principles of anti-Israel types, once the Arabs ethnically cleanse Jews from an area, it becomes Palestinian Land forever. So that if Jews return, they are "stealing" land.
Are you just as confident in this claim as you are confident that it was Israel that attacked the girls' school in Iran?
People in the West Bank should have equal rights. Israel should either annex it and give everyone citizenship or withdraw. Creating an interlocking jigsaw of Jewish and Arab towns with the Jewish ones fully integrated into Israel and the Arab ones surrounded little Bantustans is not sustainable or stable.
I am skeptical that the person you are replying to has a sincere interest in discussing this issue with objectivity in mind. He is mixing up the actions of Jordan in 1948 with the Palestinians as a whole. Anyone claiming that Jews get to steal the whole West Bank because 1% of the West Bank prior to 1948 was Jewish (many having arrived only a few years earlier at that), and thus their flight during the war retroactively grants them full ownership of the West Bank (?), is probably not arguing in good faith. Because that’s a genuinely insane line of argument to make.
More options
Context Copy link
That would inevitably lead to a lot of bloodshed. If Israel withdrew, the then almost certainly (1) the Palestinian Arabs would refuse to accept having a Jewish minority in the way that Israel has an Arab minority, rather they would viciously persecute any Jews there; and (2) J & S / WB would be used as a staging ground for terrorist attacks against Israel, except that they would be in a position to cause far more carnage.
I think annexation + citizenship is a better option, but Israel needs to wait until there is a Jewish majority so that Israel's political system won't be overwhelmed with hostile elements who want to destroy the state.
Why not?
The Israelis could do to the West Bank what they did with Gaza -- withdraw all the Jewish settlements by force and let the PA run the whole thing. Why in a million years they would consider doing so given their experience with Gaza, I don't know.
More options
Context Copy link
Notice that completely identical line of reasoning applies to Russian action in Southern and Eastern Ukraine, Although both sides there are leading a much more modern war when it comes to treatment of civilian populations.
Err, no it doesn't, because before the Russians came in the Ukrainians were in no way the Russian's problem.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
This is false. If the Israelis are going in, knocking down houses or just taking them, then that is stealing land. QED. Again, Israel has been expanding in territorial size. Neccessarily this means it must be taking land off of other groups.
Whether it was Israel or America that attacked the girls school in Iran is not of great importance. I recall you were the one implying that it was somehow the Iranians who attacked their own school. Now going 'acktually it was America not Israel that blew up this specific war in an Israeli inspired war against Iran' does not advance any kind of serious position, it's just a lame Parthian shot.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/24/israel-investigates-use-of-palestinians-as-human-shields-by-its-forces-in-gaza
https://x.com/Seanchuckle/status/2034303334044069982
No, you are wrong. There is no nice way to put this: You are a liar. You are lying about this just like you lied about Israel attacking a girl's school in Iran. (Technically, you were probably bullshitting not lying.)
It's of great importance for assessing your credibility. You claimed that it was Israel without any supporting evidence, i.e. you lied. (Technically, you were probably bullshitting.) Just like you are lying/bullshitting about Israel using Gazans as human shields and stealing land.
Please show me where I did this. Please QUOTE me. Failing that, please admit I said no such thing and apologize.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I notice that people on both sides of the conflict are very selective about which 90 year old atrocities are a causus belli excusing violent action today.
FWIW I did not bring up the ethnic cleansing of Jews in the 1930s and 40s as a casus belli. Rather, I brought it up to point out how silly it is to claim that Israel is, in essence, stealing land.
More options
Context Copy link
Their "horrible atrocities that justify our actions today" versus our "totally justified actions as a result of their historical attrocities"
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link