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 used to think there were principled arguments against Israel and that it made sense to distinguish between anti-Zionists and anti-Semites. I found it annoying when Jews would equate opposition to Israel with anti-Semitism. It felt very manipulative, playing the "antisemitism" card when we're talking about objections to a nation's policies... And of course Israel is a country, countries are made of people and run by politicians, therefore Israel is often going to do things one can reasonably condemn.
I still believe there are a tiny number of people whose opposition to Israel is rooted in genuine principles. I think their arguments are mostly pretty unconvincing, but the New Historians, for example (a school of Israeli historians who are generally pretty critical of Israel and the Israeli narrative about its founding, but obviously don't literally want Israel to cease to exist... Benny Morris is the most notable one) are examples of "anti-Zionists but not anti-Semites."
But mostly, especially since the latest Gaza War, I no longer take criticism of Israel at face value. Sure, a lot of stuff Israel does is fucked up, a lot of stuff the US does is fucked up, and I would like all countries in the world to do fewer fucked up things. Kumbaya.
But in most places, definitely including here on the Motte, you can map with nearly 100% consistency someone who is "critical of Israel" or "anti-Zionist" to "really hates Jews." It's just become very obvious that you don't have to scratch an anti-Zionist too deeply to find someone who hates Jews. It's true out in the public amongst the "Free Palestine" demonstrators, it's true here among the posters who suddenly have deep humanitarian concern for Palestinians and Iranians. Do they have similar concerns for, say, Ukrainians and Russians? Or the participants and victims in any other conflict anywhere else in the world? Of course not.
Since October 7, demonstrators attacking anything remotely connected with Israel, whether it's an Israeli-run bakery or just a synagogue (which can always be accused of being "Zionist" because the number of synagogues that aren't full of Israel supporters is infinitesimal) have pretty much given the game away. When you claim you don't hate Jews, you just hate like 90% of all Jews, well, that kinda looks like you hate Jews to me.
So, your lengthy defense of Israel isn't wrong, but it's beside the point. Almost nobody is actually criticizing Israel because they think the Israelis should negotiate differently or if they just did this or that they could have peace. There are no circumstances in which Israel will ever be "okay" with them. They just hate Jews. Simple as.
The whole "Joo hater" thing is just a thought-terminating slur against any reasonable criticism of Jewish behavior. It implies you hate Jews, so you make the criticisms, rather than the genuine problems with Jewish behavior and its consequences forming a rational basis for your complaint. Notably it always acquits Jews of any responsibility from the blowback they receive as a consequence of their own behavior.
Here we are today in a total disaster downstream of all the issues you complain about me raising on this forum, and the "Joo haters" schtick rings more hollow than ever.
I've copped several bans here in my lifetime, for being a jerk and uncivil.
Maybe it's the neurodivergence in me, but civility is not a high value from me. So believe me when I say that I believe in this argument.
Would you agree that a annoying, haranguing rules lawyer who barely scrapes by on the letter of the law, annoying the natives and engaging in disingenuous tribal argument is 'Jewish behavior'? Or, to borrow 4chan parlence, "Okay, Rabbi?"
You are engaging in Jewish behavior. Not that I believe that the definition is valid, or exists, but because you have provided one for me. You can hardly object to your own concept that you've introduced!
You have no grounds to criticize Jewish behavior when you so self-evidentially engage in it yourself!
I don't have a problem with anti-Zionism. I don't have a problem with anti-Semiticism, either! But if you could argue like a white man, instead of resorting to these nebbish forum tricks, I'd be grateful. Post hands, please!
The Jewish Lobby, the ADL, the ultra-warmongering Zionists in our media and our government like Mark Levin and Ben Shapiro, AIPAC, Israel, would you acknowledge that is all Jewish behavior? Maybe the problem people have with Jews is caused by the things they do?
Don't change the subject, particularly not with a gish gallop. I have a problem with you and your behavior. I'll acknowledge these things as soon as you admit you are acting Jewishly with your evasions. I admire your glibness of tongue and skill at lying: an observation that others have made before.
Don't really know what I am evading. Going back to the very first comment, all I was doing was disputing Amadan's claim that nearly all criticism of Zionism is derived from a pre-existing hatred of Jews for no reason. Aamadan's comment implied no space for people's perception of Jews to be influenced by the things Jews do. It's a clear argument attributing responsibility to Jews for the way people perceive them, including the negative perceptions that are basically all true.
Mr. Hitler is providing the exact map of your tactics, and so I will not engage. That you cannot earnestly engage with anyone and resort to wordcel debate tricks is not a superpower.
Why can't you take responsibility for your own behavior, as you so often rail on the Jews for not doing? Why do you pretend oppression when you constantly act in an obnoxious, Jewish way?
You are spiritually Jewish. It is not an insult. It is an observation, and a very funny one to me.
I think it is highly necessary for White people to start behaving more like Jews, in important respects.
If you can't see how this dismantles your entire argument, then I don't know what to say. If non-Jews can act like Jews, well - isn't that just behavior? What makes it particular to the Jews if other races can adopt it so easily?
I'm reminded of the stupidity of the progressive left with its expansive definition of white supremacy. Yours is the same idiocy, but for the Jews. You could just call it tribalistic nepotism and everyone would be fine with it, but you want it to be a particular crime that stains the entire Hebrew race, so you engage in these epicycles. You are not as clever as you think you are. Don't make the mistake of thinking the tactics that work on quokka liberals will work on me. I'll call you out on it every time.
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