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 -
While I think your plan to get rid of Trump has a certain charm, I thing relying on China to blow him up has some serious downsides.
I mean, MAGA is more like Venezuela than like Iran, a very personalized regime, removing Trump would certainly change US policy. On the other hand, an assassinated Trump would be as much a martyr for his cause as the Ayatollah. All the valid reasons for not blowing up the Ayatollah -- he is old, will probably die soon anyhow, will be replaced by another hardliner -- would also apply to Trump. And crucially, the effective military capabilities of the USG would not be hamstrung at all from this.
For the US, there is the option of a bloodless regime change in the midterm elections (after which he will be severely limited in his ability to make policy) seems much preferable to violent foreign interference in the US.
Now, I know your counterargument, both the Ayatollah and Trump have committed crimes against humanity (like the slaughter of protesters for the former, or the state-sanctioned Pretti shooting and the bombing of school girls for the latter) for which they should answer in the Hague, and sometimes a violent death might seem like the best available approximation to that if getting them to the Hague is not feasible, but with heads of state you always the primary concern is always the larger impact on their society, not if they personally get their just rewards or not. Once they are disposed, you can safely put them to trial.
Killing Trump would likely drive the American people further down a road of international isolation, religious fanaticism and nuclear and conventional militarism. It would also further establish your preferred precedent of just murdering heads of state which are generally disliked, and I think rather than making other leaders try to be less like Trump or the Ayatollah, they would instead work to install mechanisms where their sudden demise would create widespread negative outcomes.
It looks like the price for killing the Ayatollah was that the next one took control of the strait, if China blows up Trump that might just be the justification which Vance needs to take Greenland (to safeguard it from China, or because one of the killers wore a ski mask or whatever).
More options
Context Copy link