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.
No. It is a basic 1d move. You just can't see the board because ideology and priors.
Ukraine is important for Russia, the foaming at the mouth Brussels and UK elite that have bet a big chunk of their prestige on it, and I guess is also important for the Ukrainians - at least what is left of them.
But it is not important for the USA. After the end of the cold war Russia is so weak that it no longer needs to be contained. Case in point - the war in Ukraine. Actually devastated Ukraine that drains Europe treasure and prevents even the meager chance of Europe getting its shit together and threatening the US economic dominance is even preferrable.
The geopolitical balance won't shift too much no matter who controls that wreck of a country now. And Europe is on declining trajectory. So why bother with it. If the "new Europeans" we are importing start to dominate it will turn into shithole, if they don't - Europe will have enough internal strife to not be able to project much power outside of its border. The only challenge for USA is potentially China. And you can see that US see it that way by the comparatively better way it treats Korea, Japan and Vietnam (and well Russia).
Russia is not providing much military assistance to Iran and in the mind of Trump intelligence sharing is fair game. Trump prefers to trade with Russia than to sanction it. And because Ukraine is local problem, there is no need to get too involved with it. On the other hand Putin has hydrocarbons that are lately in something of a crunch. So aside from public's opinion, there is no real downside of giving some sanctions relief to Russia when it aligns with US interests.
USA is the seed of Albion, and by the time said Albion still played the great game competently it was known as the Perfidious Albion. And the UK had no friends only interests. Same is with USA. Although the British had more class about it.
And lastly - Zelensky thinks of himself as equal to the west, when in fact he is the west's bitch. And while some European leaders prefer the girlfriend experience and the other prefer the dominatrix one, in the case with Trump -as the brass brute that he is - seems he doesn't like his bitches talking back instead of sucking - as Ivana Trump can no longer confirm.
Ukraine was always going to end this way, and if I were in charge I would have told Zelenskyy to get stuffed in 2022 when this all started. Its just not in our strategic interests to prop up the independence of a small unimportant bit of farmland at the cost of using up our strategic reserves, making us more dependent on Muslim energy, and placing us in a terrible position of showing weakness to the globe and not being able to defend actually important Taiwan and its high end chips from China.
Zelenskyy was brilliant at quipping about not needing a ride, but that’s a shitty reason to arm them and ultimately proved Europe to be mostly too weak to worry about.
The best case scenario (other than a clear Ukrainian victory) would have been a Russian victory in 2023. By then, they would have taken enough damage to dissuade them from further adventures, but hundreds of thousands of men wouldn't have been slaughtered.
The longer this war goes on, the more screwed Ukraine is demographically.
The people who I hate the most are those who view this war as a way to test new drone technology with real live meat puppets, or who put the strategic goal of "weakening Russia" above the lives of real people.
Yes, it's all Russia's fault, but at this point the Ukrainian state is an active impediment to the happiness of the Ukrainian people. Conscription in this forever war is little better than slavery. And the women who fled to Germany are going to find husbands there and never come back. Who is being saved?
France in WWI had a population roughly equivalent to Ukraine in 2022 and suffered 1.3 million military deaths throughout the war compared to 200,000 Ukrainians in a similar amount of time. You can argue that the Ukrainian numbers are underestimates, that the overall demographic picture is different, etc., but that's not going to be anywhere near enough to account for a 6.5x difference. And France was not demographically screwed in the long-term; in fact, they managed to lose a Ukraine war's worth of military deaths a generation later and still turned out no more worse for wear.
To be fair France is very demographically screwed right now. I'm guessing there will be barely any white frenchmen in a few generations.
To be fair, "right now" is approximately 100 years later than World War I, and the effects of that war on anything in the present have probably almost completely dissolved.
If there's one thing in geopolitics that has compounding effects that increase over time, it's gotta be massive population loss (directly via killing, or indirectly via missed births).
No, massive population loss is relatively easily and quickly overcome by a corresponding baby boom.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link