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 -
The MOU Homesick Blues
Over the last two days, Donald Trump and JD Vance have been selling their embryonic Iran Deal to the American public and to the world. Trump has said, among other things:
Directly he states:
Along with this banger
JD has said:
Israeli ministers have been striking out against the deal
Now reports are coming in that Israel does not consider itself bound by the MOU, and intends to keep bombing Lebanon without reference to it.
The IRGC has stated today:
With the United States executive committed to the MOU, and Israel committed to the opposite policy, Yeshiva World News reports:
So, what now?
How does the USA navigate this problem with its erstwhile ally?
Part of me feels very strongly, the patriotic Toby Keith, regardless of your feelings about US policy or about this administration, that we can't have our president get cucked like that on the world stage. Trump has publicly signed, endorsed, justified, sold the MOU. He's stated clearly that it is necessary to the interests of the United States in maintaining the global economy. If Israel is our ally, our greatest ally, then they can't be allowed to do this to us. They can't insult and undermine the clear foreign policy of the POTUS and be allowed to do so. From the beginning I've said that Israeli forces, inasmuch as they are allied to the USA, should be under the command of an American general, Spartan style. They can't be allowed to go against us and continue to suck off the teat of the American taxpayer.
So plan trusters, antisemities, pro-Palestinians, shitlibs, anyone. Where do we go from here with Israel? What happens next? How can you, as the American President, allow your ally to undermine your own clearly stated foreign policy goals and, in your own opinion, wreck the world economy? At this point in the process what pressure can even be put on Iran?
This feels bad.
What's to be said? The Israelis had a ton of international support after 10/7, but they overplayed their hand and reacted in a way that engendered more antagonism against them then they would have had otherwise. It was very difficult to be pro-Palestinian in the immediate wake of the initial attacks, but turning Gaza into rubble at the expense of tens of thousands of civilian deaths was not seen as a proportionate response. This was especially true after they had to be bargained with to allow the importation of food and medical supplies for the civilian population. If a Democrat had been elected in 2024, we would have continued to see the same perfunctory public support for Israel combined with behind the scenes action to bring the war to a close, which may or may not have been successful. If a normal, competent Republican had been elected, we would have seen public support for Israel and continued weapons commitments, but nothing beyond that. But Bibi got Donald Trump, the one president who could be convinced to do anything provided he was personally impressed by the last person who talked to him, and the two men already had a good relationship.
Then you add the fact that he's always believed that the US should take military action in Iran, and that he deliberately chose advisors who wouldn't prevent him from doing what he wanted. The problem is that he didn't have the geopolitical wisdom to understand that prior presidents hadn't taken action because they were weak men, but because it wasn't clear that such a war could be won, at least without the kind of commitment that they were willing to make. When Trump loses the war, he's forced to make commitments to Iran that Israel doesn't like, and now Bibi has a decision to make. He managed to alienate the last person willing to give Israel the benefit of the doubt, and he has no good options at this point. It's not like Democrats are going to be more pro-Israel after the midterms. This is the legacy of Netanyahu, the complete obliteration of Israel's international standing.
But they didn't. There were pro-palestine protests two weeks after 10/7, before Israel had even started to really move on Gaza. I think that was actually the wake up call for Israel, the reason they are acting like they are, they realized that europe is rapidly islamizing and they need to go now.
And people associated with them were losing their jobs. It was a mask-off moment for anti-Zionism that essentially vindicated its critics and would have permanently damaged associated organizations if Israel had not proceeded with their avenged seventy-seven-fold plan. It was a highwater mark in public support for Israel abroad after a long period of decline.
More options
Context Copy link
This is a recurring argument I see across the political spectrum; because your most intense opponents continue to do/say outlandish things there's no sense in attempting to moderate in an appeal to public opinion and so you should just do whatever you want cause you have no control over how you're perceived. This seems to me a pretty obviously self serving attempt by extremists to rationalize extreme courses of action. You don't win when the entrenched opposition sits down and shuts up and admits you were right, you win when the general public stops finding their criticisms of you persuasive.
If you look at this YouGov tracker there was a real spike in public support for Israel after 10/7 that declined pretty rapidly as the Gaza situation got worse and worse. I don't think the American Public found the arguments of campus radicals very persuasive on 10/14, but over time Israeli actions alienated the public.
I was talking about europe not the us, still I congratulate myself on remembering the 2 weeks timespan correctly. The "moderate the tones" thing, it's not so much that they got near instant backlash over retaliating, what I'm saying is that they realizedd they have no constituency left going forward, it logically doesn't exist. If you don't believe me look at the +65 lines and the Democrats lines on that survey: what do you think it's going to happen when the 65+ die and the Democrats have power? And this is the US, the country that is going to be most favorable to israel going forward.
More options
Context Copy link
You can see this basically everywhere in politics. Biden and Trump both came in with positive approval ratings! Biden left with one of the most negative approval ratings in history, and Trump is on track to possibly do even worse.
The deepest haters are always going to hate you no matter how cool or winning you are, but most people are not your deepest haters. The numbers can differ a bit on topic but generally in our polarized society there's essentially 30% who will always hate you, 30% who will always love you, and 40% who can be persuaded in some form/don't really care that heavily to begin with. (Like swing voters/nonvoters).
The reason why leaders like Biden and Trump keep dropping in approval after isn't because citizens are being haters, it's because the leaders are failing the standards they hold. They all come in with positive expectations, and if you can't match that then you get judged appropriately. When Trump promises an end to war, less focus on culture war topics and a greater focus on consumer economics and lower prices and we get more war + endless culture war + higher prices, he failed and of course his approval goes down. They aren't just the haters, they're people who were really willing to give him a chance and he failed them.
Same thing here. Israel had a lot of support behind them! Yes there was that 30% of haters or such who wouldn't care no matter what, but the US population was largely sympathetic and behind them. But Israel took that as carte blanche to do whatever they wanted, and they starved the Gazan population and they expanded the settlements and they spoke openly of their genocidal plans. Of course people turned against Israel! They're not all the haters, they are earnestly reacting to Israel's actions.
Part of it is because they're all drinking their own Kool aid. They surround themselves with sycophants and yes men and the other 30% suckup cultists and don't realize that the support of the 40 really is conditional.
More options
Context Copy link
How is that not consistent with the idea that the public did listen to the campus radicals, but it took some time for the campus radicals to influence the public?
Campus radicals have been trying to convince Americans that Israel is a morally abominable apartheid state for 20+ years, it would be a huge coincidence if decades of persuasive efforts all paid off in a sudden public opinion swing over the span of a year in a way that was completely unrelated to Israel's actions in Gaza.
Campus radicals don't emphasize exactly the same things to exactly the same degree all the time. The Hamas attack pushed Gaza to the top of their issues list, even if they had always been concerned about it to some extent, and that increased the propaganda from the campus radicals about that particular subject.
More options
Context Copy link
I'm reminded somehow of the famous Chris Rock bit at the end of Black People vs Niggas
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Two weeks after? Try as soon as the news was out. Same day and next day. Such as the somewhat reported-upon (and somewhat denied) "gas the Jews" protest in Australia.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link