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 think most people here would accept these two things:
So I do think a very high in human capital group with their own interests is something the rest of society should notice.
And yes it was a Jew Scott Alexander who made me aware of AIPACs ability to target political races on a small budget. It’s there very high human capital that gives the group an ability to do things like AIPACs political lobbying. So yes there isn’t some Jewish hive mind working in perfect coordination, but Jews do have tribal interests. As does every tribe.
I’ve never met a Jew I didn’t get along with. I think I likely have more than a few Jewish traits. As an Italian American and as genetic testing has improved it turns out Italians and Ashkenazis share a bunch of common ancestors especially on the mother’s side. They are much more my cousins than Anglos.
I'm not calling you anything personally, nor am I implying you engage in that sort of behaviour. I'm largely indifferent to someone's personal prejudices, be it antisemite, anti-Muslim, anti-Indian, anti-apache helicopter. I'm just echoing Amadan's sentiment that this particular discourse, unless heavily moderated, has an extremely high propensity to collapse into a kind of zero-nuance intellectual junk food, where a single reductive heuristic is made to bear explanatory weight for an otherwise complex world. Take Tucker Carlson for instance, he constantly implies that Israel and Israel alone wanted this war to happen, as if Trump did not have any agency here or that the war doesn't reflect his own ideological commitments independent of Israeli/Jewish influence. It's rhetorically potent and emotionally satisfying, but it obscures more than it clarifies. At that point, it turns into a self fulfilling prophecy and even Jewish moderates grow understandably suspicious of any non-Jewish criticism of Israel, reading it through the lens of prior experience rather than in isolation. In turn, those most immersed in that discourse often do tend to display broadly negative priors, which reinforces the cycle. Kinda how black activists who fixate monolithically on institutional racism and slavery probably do signal anti-white proclivities.
I have no interest in going back in time on this issue. We are not going back to a place when any criticism of Jews are called antisemitism.
If somehow we ranked a groups political power. Jews probably control in the neighborhood of 25% of global power despite having a minimal population. If you could some how measure influence, tech, military, etc. So yes we can criticize Jews.
Isn't that just the old "white privilege"/"male privilege" argument, but repackaged?
Jews and white men are privileged. We do have higher human capital. But the conclusions are different than the wokes. I don’t believe in DEI.
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