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 -
Again, this isn’t about Gwern or Fukuyama, both of whom are very well read people, and both of whom actually have occasionally heterodox views of the kind ‘the academy’ (or generic midwit liberalism) would either balk at or at least raise eyebrows at. There are plenty of people with probably very substantial intelligence who essentially believe in this universalized western liberal democracy view of history, Mark Carney is one example that immediately comes to mind. There used to be some here in the old days (depending on exact definition there still are one or two). Dario’s writings do not come across this way. Maybe it’s easier to fool people when you can ask a decent LLM what a good counterargument is to that annoying commenter on the internet, but fortunately we have pre-AI Dario writings and they didn’t get more or less interesting.
Sanders would have called Xi Jinping an enemy of ‘western civilization’ and significantly scaled up defense spending and the US military presence in East Asia? Interesting. You speak about Trump/Hegseth’s China views as if these people - despite being the prime enemies of UN EU institutional neolib Washington consensus world bank international organization Kennedy school types for the last decade, far moreso than China - are completely separate from Amodei, as if they just independently arrived at the same conclusion at the exact same time because of the inevitability of historical circumstance, Thucydides etc. Convenient if true, that these events are all independent superstructures on the same base, I think. As is the suggestion that Amodei would, in my hypothetical, rather abandon everything and become another EA blogger (cross posted mockingly here?) if he was forced (by the market, investors, the government) to sell to China, but was rescued by Trump and Hegseth.
Because it is functionally unstoppable. Why did Britain not declare war on America in 1918, or 1945, or 1870 (the last time it would have been remotely feasible, perhaps) for that matter? By the way, this is the opinion of all the actual anti-Trump super rich and/or powerful neoliberal types I know, both in America and Europe, both young and old, that accommodation and a deal with China is necessary, that competition is futile. It is people of rather different beliefs pushing for a military confrontation with Xi. Conflating them is like saying that Macron surely wanted Trump to kill the Ayatollah, or that Trudeau surely relished his tariffs. There is no requirement for ideological coherence, but socialization, culture, education, class, background and geography bound distinct political groupings. Amodei does not belong to the recognizably hawkish neoconservative and pro-war, pro-conflict with China, Atlanticist framework of Thiel, of Karp. Max out defense spending, end woke, civilizational chauvinism, complex views on 20th century European philosophy. Fukuyama himself does not seek war with China; if anything, the End of History was about that conflict being already won. If it was, there is nothing left to do but wait.
Are the super rich, powerful etc neoliberal elites in power, in Britain or the US, now or in the near future? They seem to be increasingly sidelined in the west, among the masses and among the ruling class. And they’re out of power partly because they “sold out” their countries to China, by “allowing” us into the WTO to “flood” their market with cheap stuff, by “allowing” Chinese peasants to make their T shirts, by “allowing” Chinese students to pay insane tuition to their shitty state schools to spend on football teams. Very ungrateful of course, our labor subsidized their lifestyle or they’ll pay as much for grocery and electronics as their plumbers and nannies.
But I agree with you that the likes of Amodei and the likes of Thiel are not to be conflated. They just happen to agree on this particular thing. Which makes me nervous of course.
They are, and even if they are finally sidelined, it's an open question whether the opposition has a meaningfully different vision, or is just using the population's grievances to get into power.
Why the scare quotes? Your country is perfectly aware of the importance of protecting it's own industry.
But that was the very point of the critics of the current system: "we're getting fat and lazy off the backs of Asian labour".
You aren’t American, are you? Anyway, my point is that you don’t “allow” others as if you’re the sole force dictating other nations’ and peoples’ will. Like I said before when someone commented that America allowed the Japanese to develop: the Japanese built their own country. We built our own country. The Europeans built their own country. largely on our own, with sacrifice from our own people, and to your great benefit. So that’s a fair trade, not some altruistic good deed. And to the extent an outside force matters, it’s just a nice bonus, an important one, but still. Why haven’t Africans built their own countries if what mattered was whether you allowed them to develop? That’s delusional cope from failsons.
Yeah, I agree. It’s largely a moral failure of your ruling class, which is why I’m on this forum listening to voices sympathetic to that view. Complain to the them in your country.
Nope, European, easterner living on the west side.
Some countries have more weight to push around, and they use it to their advantage. Europe does it too, I'm sure Chine will too in due time, if it's not already doing it. You can see that sort of thing happen even between individual people.
There's obviously more than one factor involved, being in the good graces of the Americans is not a guarantee of success, but it sure helps! In case of China, I'm sure you guys could reach your current level all on your own, but surely you'll admit that being able to sell goods to the west sped things up?
I'm doing what I can...
Of course. I don’t completely buy the ccp’s “peaceful rise” narrative, although I think there’s truth in it. Even if it’s mostly not kinetic, with our weight we inevitably clash with others’ interests. I just hope it’s more civil and less zero-sum. I’m also not against selling off some of our interests in exchange for others.
I don’t deny it. Unlike the most hawkish Chinese nationalists, I do believe Americans aren’t just being calculating but also have mutual benefits in mind. I’m just saying it’s hypocritical for Americans to bring that up every other minute as if it’s a charity instead of a trade. They enjoyed unparalleled material wealth partly because of Asian (mostly Chinese) labor and Europeans and Japanese/Koreans being their vassals. It’s annoying that they complain about an arrangement they set up for their own interest, but their elite bungled it. Surely as a European you’d understand what I meant.
I feel sympathetic to you guys for having an elite class who constantly sell out their own people to Americans, or worse, to various strains of third worlders who certainly do not deserve it. Is this because of your aristocratic traditions, where the blue bloods share no interests with the muggles? It’s completely mysterious, scary and painful to watch from a distance.
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
More options
Context Copy link