site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 6, 2026

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.

3
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

No peace deal with Iran

Can I just point out that 21 hours seems too short for negotiations? I don't think the talks were done in earnest, at all. The 150-page JCPOA took almost 2 years of frivolous negotiations and lasted just as long. A 21 hour session in the middle of an active conflict is not very likely to reach a better equilibrium that both parties are happy with. Iran carried bloodstained schoolbags of kids killed in the Minab strike on the flight to Pakistan, they were certainly not there to surrender. I suspect the administration (or at least Vance) already knew this, and deliberately structured one-sided terms intended to be rejected so Trump can attempt building political scaffolding for escalation and blame Iran ("Look, we offered Iran a peace deal and they chose not to accept it"). Meanwhile, the Israelis have been busy!

Between accepting one of the greatest strategic defeats in decades, and trying to prosecute a horrific war amidst historic energy and food prices, we remain stuck with the latter.

I mean, the negotiation positions were far too far apart for this to work.

From America's POV, we have been kicking Iran's ass left and right to the point that any reasonable regime would have already Fed Ex'd us their uranium.

From Iran's POV they have discovered this awesome new trick, which is just basically the modern equivalent of unrestricted submarine warfare, and think this is a trump card they can used forever to get cash, get nukes, etc.

I have to think, that despite European public declarations that they are basically blaming the US for Iran's actions, behind the scenes they acknowledge that Iran cannot be rewarded for what they have done. There are simply far too many analogous situations in the world. Just in the Strait of Hormuz Oman or the UAE could demand the same. For the Suez/Straight of Gibraltar you have the whole Mediterranean, Ethiopia, Somalia, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Yemen, Eritrea, Djibouti, Sudan. This tactic is basically untenable, and really if France or UK or Germany had any stones, they'd be encouraging us to nuke Tehran as a response.

Or maybe I am wrong and Europe is truly too poor and too weak to do anything about this or anything else. They have given up on the idea of nonproliferation entirely and expect nukes in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc and dont care to raise a finger.

There are simply far too many analogous situations in the world. Just in the Strait of Hormuz Oman or the UAE could demand the same. For the Suez/Straight of Gibraltar you have the whole Mediterranean, Ethiopia, Somalia, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Yemen, Eritrea, Djibouti, Sudan. This tactic is basically untenable

I maintain that it's worse than anyone thinks. Again, the only way for Iran to control the Strait is to strike ships outside their territorial waters, and specifically in another nation's waters. The precedent, therefore, is that one can declare control over any important waters within credible (at least, what insurers consider credible) range of their anti-ship missiles... I'm not up on the latest tech, but I believe there are some out there that can go over 500km.

Israel

Can you imagine the outcry if Israel were to declare that they were going to start attacking ships using the Suez without paying a toll to Israel "because of Hamas's illegal war against them"? It'd be hilarious to watch the comments.

really if France or UK or Germany had any stones, they'd be encouraging us to nuke Tehran as a response

What Europe really doesn't need is breaching the nuclear taboo when Russia has a 10:1 advantage in tactical nukes over NATO, when the US is openly dismissive towards NATO. Russian conventional forces are no match for Europe's but they enjoy huge nuclear superiority.

And Europe's not exactly keen on 'total energy apocalypse' as the enraged Iranians fling ballistic missiles absolutely everywhere, immolate all the Middle East's energy production. Maybe they fling some dirty bombs around too, why not at this stage? Would anyone blame them?

Encouraging a nuclear war is the absolute last thing that France or Germany would want!