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’d like to take a moment to discuss the present and future of the Republican Party within the United States, specifically as it pertains to how a post-Maga consensus and organization may emerge.
Following the Afghanistan and Iraq interventions by then president George W. Bush, public sentiment had largely turned against what is colloquially known as the Neo-Cons, largely exacerbated by media outrage and Democratic politicians lambasting said interventions as wastes of time, lives and initiated upon faulty grounds. In spite of both operations being successful in toppling the reigning dictatorial regimes within the respective middle eastern countries, they were predominantly framed as failures both internally within and without. Largely as a result of this antagonism, a countermovement emerged within the Republican Party, led by Donald Trump which sought to subvert not only the Neo-Con interventionist stance, but also the Atlanticist and pro-NATO foreign policy which had dominated the party since the second world war, in favor of an “America First” way of thinking.
The result of his tenure as president, both first and second term combined has largely been to the disappointment of many, even the many hardliners within the party as the man in question proved unable to deliver on his many promises such as bringing manufacturing back to the Rust Belt (of which tariffs could not abate the decay), the end of Free Trade as a means of lowering prices back home (the former is arguably a success, the latter is not), and in ending foreign entanglements (more on this below). The GOP all the same has become almost entirely captivated by his personage, and outside of Trump, there is little consensus among Republican politicians and political theorists as to the path the party ought to follow. What is clear however, is that his rule has largely been to the detriment of the country, especially as it pertains to America’s relationship with its allies in NATO, and as it pertains to its capability to project force abroad.
The recent conflict with Iran underlines this point quite clearly. Unlike the War on Terror, which successfully managed to overthrow tyrannical regimes stoking Islamist sentiment within the region, the American military has failed to effectively incapacitate Iran’s nuclear enrichment capabilities (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-how-many-nuclear-bombs-b2967811.html), nor has it effectively weakened the regime sufficiently for a popular uprising to topple it. Whether this is solely due to an atrophying of the military industrial complex, the lack of cooperation and involvement with allied countries via NATO, Trump hamstringing the army and navy due to his obsession with “making deals” or any number of other possible explanations (never mind the possibility of it being all of the above), it is quite clear that as of now the USA is in no position to contest the globe with the likes of China or Russia. Only once these industries are revitalized, the military let of its leash and true cooperation established once more within NATO can this problem be resolved, and that’ll require an end to this Maga experiment and Donald Trump’s hold over the party.
A sentiment which has become increasingly prominent over these past few years of Maga influence is the need for a revitalized GOP, capable of once more cooperating across the aisle with their Democratic counterparts for the betterment of America as a whole. Pelosi echoed this sentiment in 2024 (https://www.npr.org/2024/08/07/nx-s1-5058779/pelosi-says-we-need-a-strong-gop-and-that-this-one-is-a-cult-to-a-thug), noting the significant differences between prior Republican leaders and Trump, as well as the need for “a strong GOP”. Obama has similarly noted the need for a post Trump consensus last week (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/barack-obama-worried-democrats-republicans-gobbledygook_n_69fb66d0e4b0cb033e4de37a), which will require a rehabilitation of some sort for the past of the GOP, one which can only begin once we look past populist politics. Hasan, perhaps unsurprisingly in response to Obama’s words, said he wanted “no Republican party”, which is perhaps indicative of the conflicting interests between the two groups.
This goal of a strong GOP, as stated, will require a reexamination of past Republican politicians and presidents, and a more generous way of assessing their successes and failures. This work however has already begun, and was most notable during the campaign of Kamala Harris. Her campaigning with Liz Cheney, the fact that Dick Cheney prior to his death voted for her (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/dick-cheney-kamala-harris-liz-cheney-rcna169979), and Liz’s attempt at getting George W. Bush to endorse Harris (https://www.thedailybeast.com/liz-cheney-tells-george-w-bush-to-endorse-kamala-harris-its-time/) shows that there is a significant desire among the moderates of the GOP to escape the influence of Magaist politics. Naturally, how exactly this transformation of the party will take place after Trump leaves the White House is purely speculative, and doubtless there’ll be those who'll seek to emulate his success. However, I believe there is sufficient reason to assert that broad, consensus-based politics will once more emerge within America, which’ll hopefully initiate a process of rebuilding for the damages the last decade of Trumpist politics have inflicted on the nation.
Bro, you should visit America sometime.
And citing a roster of Democratic talking points concern trolling the guy who just handed them their absolute asses time after time is less than convincing.
Both the far right and far left are locked out of power and fighting themselves. The political coalitions that make up the parties are shifting fast, and no one knows exactly when the cultural music will stop and we'll all be stuck again. But it is my estimation that the political energy and momentum is with the right generally, and bog-standard MAGA specifically. Trump is speed-running the Big List of American Opposition Countries on his way to cement his legacy as the most transformational president since FDR (and perhaps just as damaging). Even if there's a glitch or two, the current state of Ukraine, Israel, Korea, Venezuela, Cuba and Iran are all in much better realpolitik position than when he started. The middle east generally is lining up and making nice. These are not losses for Trump, no matter what Huffpo and NPR say.
All the hysterics are just the old guard losing control of a narrative that gave them cultural and political control for half a century. But nothing is forever.
Fuck you again, JTarrou, for being a great master of phrase. You had me in the first half, not gonna lie.
The first Trump admin was important for its cultural shift and, frankly, vibes. But what were the major accomplishments? Tax cuts (Republican standard forever) and SCOTUS confirmations (the personal project of Mitch McConnell). Other than that ... not so much.
The second admin has been eventful to say the least. Things are happening and getting done. Now, as your wonderful comment says, is that to an ultimate good or productive end? T-B-fucking-D. There are some clear wins like broad deregulation. The Rubio architected western hemisphere foreign policy may be the biggest sea change since the Marshall Plan. While I broadly agree on your realpolitik assessment regarding the middle east, Trump may have, ironically, done more for the deep antisemitic movement in the USA than Representative Ilhan Omar of
MogadishuMinneapolis. The Tariffs may be a nothing burger macro-economically, but they may have been the last nail in the coffin for disaffected rust belt White Men. You know, the ones who vote 90% for Trump.After Trump is going to look something like a loose alliance between the Christian Nationalist (I say that endearingly) Josh Hawley's of the country and the neo-neo-con Rubio's. Stuck in the middle will be the MAGA-by-convenience Vances, Hegseths and Patels. The problem with the latter group is that they never actually had a durable or deep political theory to begin with. They're essentially right leaning opportunists.
I worry about the intellectual and "formal" (if that's the right term ... perhaps "institutional") backbone of the GOP. Close political watchers are aware of the current case of Steve Daines, Senator from Montana.
Daines was elected as a Republican Senator in a State that had been solid blue since the 1980s (Montana has a weird union history). During the Biden Admin, he was the head of the Republican Senate Reelection Campaign. His job was to flip the Senate for the Republicans in 2024. He did that, including hand recruiting the other Senator from Montana, Tim Sheehy, who unseated Jon Tester, a Montana native who had been a Democrat Senator since 2007.
After such a successful time at the head of the NRSC, Daines was expected to, perhaps, join the 2024 Trump Admin. At the very least, he could be chair of any committee he wanted. What did he choose?
To retire.
Unexpectedly in March, Daines announced he wouldn't file to run for re-election in what promised to be an absolute Sunday stroll back into his Senate seat.
Daines never grabbed a lot of headline attention but was quietly very influential and a prolific fundraiser. He was also a dyed in the wool Regan era conservative.
Speculating, I wonder if folks like Daines see that MAGA 2.0 is hurdling towards a crack up. Mid-terms are looking bad, although perhaps not as apocalyptic as once thought. But, beyond that, 2028 is looking to potentially setup Little Marco to get down and dirty with J.D. Vance. Is that the divorce that kills the party? Who knows, but I'd bet people like Daines have a strong opinion.
Much to be seen in the future. I wonder about the anti-semitism though. It's endemic in the middle east, but Trump has managed to get most of the Sunni arab countries to moderate on Israel and many are doing public or private deals, including Saudi Arabia and the new Al Qaeda government of Syria. Something weird is happening, where over half the Palestinians didn't join the last jihad, the Sunnis are mostly out of the mideast terror game, but antisemitism is rising at least publicly in the west. Somehow Iran, the only Shia power, is the last holdout for Sunni supremacy in the Levant, funding the last dead-ender Hamas.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link