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 -
What is the Zionist model of antisemitism*?
Matt Yglesias posted what turned out to be a surprisingly hot take that the downturn in public opinion of Israel is a result of Israeli actions, and that the best way for Israel to fix its public relations problem is to change its actions vis-a-vis the Palestinian issue and foreign policy.
I was surprised at the pushback. This seems straightforwardly true. There was a great chart I saw a few days ago, which I am unfortunately unable to find, which showed that public opinion of Israel has been approximately this low before. It was in 1982 with the invasion of Lebanon and the notoriously brutal siege of Beirut.
Most of the alternative theories fell into two camps.
It’s hard to tell how religious the people in 2. are, but my general impression is, “quite a bit”. Many of them seem to speak of antisemitism as if it were a spiritual fault, another manifestation of the platonic ideal of pure evil. Seen as a spiritual problem, the correct response is to become even more aggressively Jewish. This has the rather large problem of being counterproductive when, e.g. smashing idols goes wrong.
*By “antisemitism” in this post I almost exclusively mean “antizionism”. I use the term to maintain consistency with the pro-Israel literature I am engaging with, not as an endorsement that antizionism = antisemitism.
And those “left center” or whatever you want to call them group of bloggers have been posting for days that Dems need to drop Israel because Israel is not doing enough for Democrats. Some reason this reminds me of the quote “fairness feels like oppression when your use to privilege”. Jews and Israel have been in voting and dollars backing Dems at about an 85% rate for decades. They still found support on the right because of Evangelicals end time stuff and I think a general feeling on the right that Jews in the ME are better friends than Muslims.
I think we are at a point where Jews/Israel are going to have to decide which party they back and won’t be able to play both sides anymore. I am tired of Jews running an ethnostate and opposing the West from shutting down immigration. At this point I think the Jews have no choice but to go hard right. The current forces on the left in the west love brown and unsuccessful people. The Jews are too rich and white to have a seat with the Dems.
I am disappointed Trump hasn’t struck a harder bargain with Israel. I can love the Jews if their money and political power goes all in on white nationalism. Anyway Yglesias an Noah Smith etc are saying the Jews need to do more for Dems if the want backing for Israel and I’ve been saying the opposite that we need more support from them if they want support from MAGA.
I think Yglesias just realizes Israel/Jews are unpopular with the left and pushing them out of the Democrats has political benefits but he’s acting it’s like the Jews left the Dems instead of the Dems turning against Jews first.
If we went back in time the only way Israel could fix their political problems would be backing tough border enforcement in Europe and the rest of the west. The US and Europe being filled with third worlders always meant the left would eventually become anti-Israel. And then the right wouldn’t despise Israel for backing immigration.
Why would you frame it as "playing both sides" when whites, hispanics, and Asians also voted for both parties last election?
Dems are demanding it for one (Yglesias)[https://x.com/mattyglesias/status/2045619973586837717?s=46]
And second interests groups do tend to only support one party. Catholics only vote GOP. Evangelicals GOP. Blacks Dem. Historically Jews Dem. Sure you can say this isn’t 100% support but these group have been 85% voting and donating to one party.
Why should the GOP back Israel when Dems won’t yet 85% of Jews vote Dem and donate to Dems. Politics is transactional.
To what extent are American Jews in support of Israel? Seems like a very sizable contingent of them think there is a genocide in Gaza, which sounds like they belong right in the D camp. Why should GOP (or Dem) treatment of Israel be influenced by Jewish American voters any more than, say, their treatment of China is influenced by Chinese American voters?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Whites, Hispanics, and Asians are not single-issue voters. "Jews/Israel" really means Ethnocentric-Israel-Single-Issue-Voters. Up until recently, their single issue hasn't been an issue -- being impartial to either party.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link