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 -
That is not even terrible. If it gets even remotely implemented - it is the end of Pax Americana. I mean that pax americana was closing is clear but that will hasten it. Any deal that leaves any uranium or nuclear facilities in Iran is abject failure. Everything else could be negotiable.
The 300 billion fund is a trap for Iran and the regime. They may get the investment, but not ownership. That will be a great way to funnel some outside perspective and will globohomo them in no time.
I think that USA should have pushed to the end even if it meant massive civilian casualties. It is better to be empire of evil than no empire at all.
What would be stopping them from nationalizing the investment in a year?
The usual strategy is that whenever someone nationalizes the properties of US companies, the US backs a military coup in that country, but if the US could stage a coup in Iran we would not be in this place.
More options
Context Copy link
Counting on Iran to respect the invisible lines globohomo relies on to survive is a fools gambit given Iran exists in its current state precisely because it did not respect those invisible lines. It's a pillar of their identity. On the flipside, the west is losing their identity fast through nothing but their own inaction and stupidity. What globohomo will be left to subjugate Iran in a 100 years?
I think the US and EU should recognize that the market centric self hating mass migration fueled jew worshipping ideology they've been holding on to is a dead end. Sacrificing more white men to keep this satanic third world welfare program running is not better than the alternative. I'd think the horrors from Ukraine exemplify what can happen when an empire in name only tries to flex its 'might'.
The west needs to think inward. The leaders are weak, the people even more so. Foreign policy is just a cope for this state of affairs. The concept itself becoming incoherent and absurd when the people running the show are either zionists or third worldist at heart. It's a big theater to make the dead ends of humanity feel like they are a part of some forward momentum, some progression. When in reality they sold their future out for the promise of cheaper strawberries and the emotional warmth and moral superiority the TV gave them when it desecrated their ingroup in the name of a morality where everyone can be good so long as we all hate white people. The future doesn't concern the people of the west. They've morally abdicated from it. Black women should just run everything.
America has been an empire in name only for some time now. It doesn't export Americanism. It exports the poison that is killing it. The elections are becoming fake, the leaders foreign ideologues. The walls are closing in. People wish for one last hurrah directed against a manufactured enemy that exists because of an incoherent foreign policy dictated to the Americans by foreigners.
It's all tits up and we need a mental reset. And whilst the best we've gotten so far are Alex Jones edits and looks obsessed men suntanning their taints, there was a time when things were different in spirit, even if just for a little while. But recognizing that would require some humility and courage, which is a big thing to ask of Americans and Europeans.
More options
Context Copy link
I get the impression that it ended in 2023 with the Houthis restricting passage through the red sea. The poorest country in the middle east standing up to the USA and europe means there is no pax americana. Hormutz is just a repeat of that, except us europeans didn't even bother trying this time around.
Saying that this peace deal puts an end to american supremacy makes it seem vibes based when I see it more as fact based. It makes me think that "sunken cost fallacy" is a misnomer, it's just as much a logical error as it is socially enforced. We should call it "sunken cost marriage".
The US violated international law by attacking Iran. Iran predictably retaliated by suspending innocent passage through Hormuz, which is also a violation of international law. What exactly should a law-abiding European nation do? We do not have the military capability to sink the US ships threatening Iran and destroy the Iranian ability to threaten innocent passage.
Personally, I would just have made a deal with Iran where it lets through ships destined for Europe and gets French enriched uranium in return. Instead we mostly did nothing and hoped that Trump would chicken out eventually, which it now seems like he did.
Still believe in international law in 2026? That's marginal right?
I am from Europe. The principles of international law were not developed by some pink-haired idealists, they were agreed upon after we spend a few millennia murdering each other and were getting really really good at it. Even if they are unevenly enforced, they still lead to an outcome which is vastly better than the alternative. Like OSHA handbooks, they are rules written in blood.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link