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 should go tell the oil and bond traders. In fact, if you're so confident you should go buy bonds and short oil on leverage and see what happens :)
Serious shortages of essential products ranging from diesel and motor oil to fertilizer? Japan desperately dumping treasuries to cover their oil costs? Did you miss the failed Yen bailout followed by the failed bond bailout?
Iran was not going to get a nuclear weapon in the first place so this has all the probative value of Lisa Simpson's anti-tiger rock.
as we've established, Iran has already received protection money from Gulf countries and charged passing ships money to use their new tolled route. That is, they've already tolled the strait.
Does it only count as "tolling the strait" if the victims all assemble under the full moon to sign a blood oath in the personal presence of the Ayatollah? Because it sounds like you just gave a standard that Trump is already losing under.
Is English your third language? I never said it wasn't an "act of war" but last I checked Iran and the UAE didn't sign a peace treaty. When you pay protection money to the mafia it's the mafia who gets to decide what that "protection" entails, not you. If anything the fact that the Emiratis are literally flying cargo planes loaded with cash and gold only to get bombed anyway makes Iran's position look stronger, not weaker.
No it isn't. That's just not true. Both gas and oil were ~25% cheaper before the war began. You're just making things up at this point.
Not to mention that you totally dodged bond yields, potentially an even bigger problem.
No it isn't. He was claiming to be on the verge of reaching a deal just last week and a week before that was threatening to annihilate Iranian civilization.
Now he's impotently doing nothing as Iran freely hits ships at will. At least in the beginning of the war he would respond to Iranian strikes with American strikes, now he doesn't even bother with that.
Which ships got charged? I'm sure you know so feel free to share here. In fact, if you're so confident you should go buy polymarket contracts and see what happens :)
More options
Context Copy link
Iran does not control the straits of Hormuz. When confronted with this you reply that the price of oil has gone up. Make an argument.
The last time I remember discussing this the sourcing was Iranian news mangling a Reuters report that said nothing close to this being claimed.
You are still denying the reality that American ships are escorting oil tankers through the strait.
Iran and the UAE were never at war so there is no need for them to sign a peace treaty, except that Iran has started bombing their ships anyways. Pedantic, smug, and wrong.
?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link