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 -
With three days until Election Day, is there still enough time for the Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in Michigan?
Cenk Uygur's Rebellion PAC dropped a controversial new ad supporting the Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El Sayed featuring a grocery store conversation about Israel. Some are calling it the most antisemitic ad of all time:
Now, I don't think this is a very good ad. It's poorly acted and a bit too on-the-nose, but accusing the political opposition of wasting money on unpopular special interests while regular citizens deal with rising prices is probably the most common political maneuver in modern American politics. Apparently, this ad is at the center of a possible last-minute fracture of the Michigan Democratic coalition.
Haley Stevens, El Sayed's defeated challenger in the dem primary, released an incredibly passive aggressive statement preemptively thanking El Sayed for his "Expected Condemnation of Antisemitic Campaign Advertisement". Amusingly, long-time TYT host Ceng Uygur has been demoted to "Hasan Piker's Uncle". In case you didn't catch the subtext, this is a threat to pull her support (as explained by Haley Stevens's fiance on TMZ for some reason?). Abdul appears to have no intention of disavowing the ad.
This doesn't seem to have affected El Sayed's chances in the prediction markets. He is now up to an 80% chance to win, but I guess we'll see what happens at the black church on Sunday.
This mostly just illustrates the enormous gap between perceptions of the elite and perceptions of the actual voting public. Abdul runs 7 points ahead of his baseline support with voters who are "focused on Israel". Support for Israel among normies is around 65-35 at this point, on the level of "trans the kids", "open the borders" or "raise my taxes". If the media remotely reflected actual public opinion they'd be asking Rogers why he supports unconditional support to a country with an approval rating comparable to syphilis.
This whole "controversy" kind of reminds me of that time Trump compared MS13 to "animals" and then the media ran with it for a week assuming that it would hurt him somehow.
I think the voters know that, if Abdul were in charge, he wouldn't merely take money away from Israel. He'd want to give money to Hamas instead. Charitably, the money wouldn't go directly to Hamas, but laundered through NGO's first. Same difference though.
Americans may feel negatively towards Israel. But they really don't like terrorists. The choice isn't Israel or nobody. It's Israel or global Islam.
I echo @Vollerei when I say that I would like to live the rest of my life without having to think about Islam even once. But, they're here I guess, and they seem determined to seize as much political power as we'll let them have.
Virtually all Muslim countries except Iran don't support Hamas materially even if they hate Israel. And his anti-Israel leftist base don't particularly like Hamas they just hate Israel and particularly view the war in Gaza as a genocide. I find the idea that Abdul would need to mirror the US support for Israel if it become pro-Palestine questionable I think I pro-Palestine America would look a lot more like Ireland than Iran. Both extremely pro-Palestine nations but obviously very different in how that support is expressed. Americas Arab allies as well all hate Hamas with a burning passion.
I'm not sure if this argument expresses the point you intended it to. Most people in Ireland virulently hate Israel, turn a blind eye to Hamas's activities and are happy to donate money to organisations which are, at the very least, affiliated with Hamas.
No my point is the Irish state does not furnish weapons or money to Hamas despite the population virulently hating Israel.
True, the Irish state doesn't directly furnish weapons to Hamas. It has, however, donated over €68 million to UNRWA in the last twenty years, and a significant proportion of UNRWA staff are known to have participated in the October 7th attacks.
Depends on your definition of "significant portion". I'd say there were certainly more than there should have been, but a "significant" portion of UNRWA staff? Unless there's new information, I'd say not.
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