site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 15, 2026

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.

5
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The US did it in Iraq, they secured ground against an entrenched enemy - and in much larger cities too. US infantry are actually decent at fighting. Or Russian infantry, they secure cities too. They took Mariupol, it was a tough fight against committed Azov defenders. They took Bakhmut, which is bigger and a lot better defended than these random hills in Lebanon. But they actually take ground and once ground is taken it stays taken. The Israelis go on these raiding missions into Gaza and blow things up but can't seem to take and hold territory.

caring about PR

The Israelis 'care about PR' but would never let it affect their military tactics, which include terror bombing, torturing prisoners and just randomly shooting people. They go on twitter and write these random screeds. This is from the Israeli minister of national security:

For every tear of an Israeli mother, a thousand Lebanese mothers must weep. All of Lebanon must burn! With all due respect to the Americans, Israel must make it clear to the entire world that the blood of our sons and the security of our citizens are not forfeit. All of Lebanon must burn. Our supreme duty is to protect the citizens of Israel and the soldiers of the IDF, and this commitment takes precedence over every other consideration.

I told the Prime Minister, even in our private meetings: For every tear of an Israeli mother, a thousand Lebanese mothers must weep. Enough with the ping-pong. In the Middle East, you don't win with measured responses and restraint—you need to go berserk. To obliterate. To crush the terror.

But even with them blowing up all these buildings, dropping all these bombs - that is not achieving political goals! Even if what you say is true and that no nation can handle entrenched urban enemies while 'caring about PR' against tough, determined foes. Then that should affect strategy. I would simply not attempt military operations that cannot achieve my political goals, or that cost more than they gain!

Same with the US. Blowing up the Iranian airforce and navy, even if the US actually did that and it's not just cope... who cares? Did it accomplish US political goals? No! Blowing up power plants would've just seen the Iranians blow up more oil facilities in the Middle East. That doesn't help America achieve its goals, quite the reverse.

If Israel wants to conserve its international reputation, avoid casualties, conquer land, defeat and divide its enemies... well it needs to prioritize, Israel is not a great power and can't have all of those things simultaneously. The US can't do everything it wants simultaneously against determined opponents. If Israel embrace a doctrine of using human shields (the 'mosquito protocol') to approach boobytrapped buildings, that's necessarily going to affect your international reputation. There are tradeoffs and limitations for these powers.