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 -
You had these ideas all the time, in fact this shift to nationalism is how the original socialism evolved right after Lenin's death. This is how it worked everywhere since the beginning - be it Stalinism or Maoism, or different strains of socialism with nationalistic characteristics including Chavismo, Pol Potism etc. Some of them were also more pragmatic and more friendly toward capital such as Titoism or Dengism or Đổi Mới in Vietnam. You also have extremes such as in North Korea with outright ultranationalist Juche ideology and cult of personality which looks closer to absolute monarchy. This is the horseshoe theory in practice - socialist states evolve into fascist states by market reforms and fascist states sometimes evolve toward more outright socialism such as with Peronism or Ba'athism. They all gravitate toward this petty corrupt tyranny.
All of them to the single one are unable to solve shit, not to even talk about issues you are pointing out. This is the feature, not a bug of all the socialist systems. It is in their DNA that they will never achieve their purported goals.
Stalinism mobilized millions to fight WW2 and industrialized Russia. Mao unified mainland China. Ba'athism managed to drag various backwards sects into the modern age. All of these nations had big problems, and these guys tried to solve them.
But these nations did not reach the end of history, except N-Korea, so therefor they failed? Unlike the glorious western powers that are in the process of transitioning towards third worldism in the most literal sense possible since they can't maintain their populations whilst being blinded by greed.
National Socialism is a solution. When societies have a problem that they can't solve, often because the problem is baked into the system itself, they need someone to break the glass and pull the fire alarm. The post we are replying to is pointing out problems and looking for solutions. I find it obvious and predictable that OP is gravitating towards authoritarianism, calls to duty, necessity and unity. How do you get those things? National Socialism.
To that extent your post is just a general screed against failed states. Well, so far every state is a failed state. Except N-Korea, of course. So what is the point? Are we pretending that the course of human history hasn't been dictated by authoritarian leaders? Are we just not acknowledging that our 'democracies' and 'open societies' are a complete anomaly, a living experiment that is in the process of failing completely in every single country around the globe? Or are we pretending that we can afford to ignore the problems until they just poof and go away?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link