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 -
Can you help me understand what the pronoun this represents above? Does it refer to Jews systematically favoring the interests of their fellow Jews over the interests of non-Jews as part of the observance of an explicit religious obligation? Is it Jews hiding their general perfidy by systematically misrepresenting their religious beliefs to non-Jews? Something else entirely?
Also, what is the educational propaganda you have in mind here? You've called (many times) for a rejection of the broad historical consensus that several million European Jews were systematically murdered in WWII - is that what you mean? Are you talking about disinformation surrounding the historical settling / foundation of Israel and Israel's conduct in its historical / current wars? Propaganda about Israel's treatment of non-Jewish residents within its 1967 borders and the occupied territories? Propaganda about Jewish religious beliefs and obligations? Something else?
It does refer to Jews being bestowed special ingroup status by their religious doctrine and the particular obligations they have to each other within their ingroup. It's misleading to present it as being universal because it is not. It is evidence for the ethnic particularity built into the religion but it gets presented to Gentiles in a way that intentionally obscures the meaning of the passage. The motive for including that in the statement by Mamdani is unknown. Mamdani himself may have heard it and recalled it, but I consider it unlikely. Most likely it was ghostwritten or suggested by Jewish contributors to the initiative, of which I am sure there were many. If it were the latter it would fall under perfidy.
I've called for a rejection of the historical consensus that several million European Jews were murdered inside gas chambers that were deceptively disguised as shower rooms. That claim is the centerpiece of the Holocaust, and it forms one crucial component of educational propaganda but is by no means its only aspect.
I am talking about their strategy for maintaining the consensus that Jews are not allowed to be criticized for their own behavior, including their organization and activism in the United States and especially that which is on behalf of Israel. Holocaust Education is and always has been central to that goal- establishing it as taboo to make any criticism whatsoever about the way they organize politically and culturally- because that's supposed to be antisemitic. The way you enforce that convention is with initiatives like these. And left-wing antisemites themselves try to play along with that standard, begging Jews to accept the difference between their criticism of Israel and criticism of Jews as a whole.
Consider that Mamdani has accused the Israeli government of committing a genocide in Gaza. Yet he is pledging public money to bus students to the Museum of Jewish Heritage which is an institution that supports Israel and without question curates the content of the museum in an attempt to foster support for Israel, particularly among young people. So Mamdani says Israel is committing a genocide, and then uses taxpayer money to bus kids to institutions dedicated to exposing children to lies about gas chambers disguised as shower rooms in order to guilt them into supporting Israel and never being critical of the way Jews assert themselves in culture, politics, and religion.
No; the centerpiece of the Holocaust is that the Nazis attempted to exterminate all the Jews and got a substantial amount of the way there. The alleged means are and always have been secondary at best - it is well-known that the extermination program started with firing squads. We've done this dance before, but on that occasion, you ceased responding when I got to asking an important question which I'd like you to answer now: why, in your view, did the Nazis not try to exterminate the Jews? Do you claim that they didn't want to, that they inexplicably had some moral qualms? Or that they wanted to, but didn't believe they had the means? Or is it that they wanted to, but only meant to get around to it later and hadn't actually started by the time the Reich fell? Which is it, and what makes you believe that?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link