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 -
So Trump has now not only signed an oil deal with Russia, but also wants to lift sanctions. This seems totally indefensible. Not only does it send a clear signal (if the Greenland debacle was not clear enough) that America no longer gives a shit about the rules-based world order or the stability of the west as a block, by removing sanctions from a country that is fighting an aggressive war and that Europe regards as a serious threat. It also lifts sanctions on an ally of Iran. A country that America is currently fighting and active war against. A country that Russia is providing with military aid. He is trying to lower the high oil prices caused by the war with Iran, but seemingly making Iran stronger in the process by aiding its ally, thus making the war more difficult.
Is there some 5head strategy move I am not seeing here? Or is the man actually that inept? Is this because he is mad that Zelensky called him weak?
It seems stupid and incredibly short sighted, and it is difficult to see how this will even help America.
I feel like the framing of your question needs some reconsideration. Countries always claim to care about rules based international order, and then never actually do if they need something. This is not new. Our ties to Europe are deep except the Europeans don't care for their treaty obligations, are lately nearly useless allies, and claim that our relationship with them is now over because Trump is bad. Why spend American effort on helping them?
The impact on the conflict with Iran is uncertain. You could easily make this deal with hidden concessions involving that.
In the moment right now the US needs to loosen restrictions to help our economy and everyone else's. We can put it back later.
People are going to scream and blame America and Trump no matter what we and he does. That further incentivizes doing this, especially as a temporary measure.
It's also a fantastic move if you want to punish Ukraine for not following Trump's requests. You might not like that strategy but it is a good implementation of it.
Europeans generally understand themselves as allies of something like "the US minus Trump+supporters", thinking, whether rightly or wrongly, that this makes them allies of the essential part of the country. Indeed, it's easy to forget now but before the multiple-year-long media campaign, the cause of post-Maidan Ukraine was understood to be a geopolitical concession to/imposition by the Americans (see Victoria Nuland, Biden's constant threats and pressure to suspend Nord Stream in favour of US LNG, etc.). If Trump is now visibly reluctant or obstructive towards Ukraine, this reinforces that European understanding: Ukraine is a proxy war between Trump+Russia and Dems+US deep state+Europe.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link