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 -
I really don't like making grand pronouncements (I think it's a bit narcissistic) but since I seem to have a reputation on The Motte I think it's only fair to take my licks:
Blah blah blah, words words words, excuses excuses, feel free to get your licks in now.
I think people liked the MAGA parts of Trump’s agenda, but disliked the neocon parts. So “back to the old Republican party” is exactly the wrong takeaway.
Unfortunately I also agree that the unpopularity of the war in iran is basically bullshit, and it was plainly the right thing to do. A full scale invasion would have been a terrible idea but neutering Iran is a positive. I hope we don’t let them off the hook.
Fuentes preached that if you wanted to stop the Israel lobby you had to be willing to hold a gun to the GOP’s head over the issue, even if it meant giving control to the Democrats. Clearly he meant it. I think this is idiotic. Complaining about money or military aid for Israel is one thing, but it’s a drop in the bucket compared to everything else.
I don't know what Fuentes truly believes, but if I try to reconstruct his theory by reading into his public statements it would be something like this:
The problem is not the money or military aid to Israel, it's the split loyalties, lack of focus, and bad optics caused by Israel-sympathizers in the American right. This problem is not just theoretical, since it is evident that Trump himself, the leader of MAGA, is a huge Israel-supporter. It is impossible to build a successful right-wing populist movement in the US as long as every time it wins power, it immediately disappoints its supporters by using that power to help Israel while neglecting American issues. Even just the appearance that it does this, even if the appearance is inaccurate, is devastating. We see this manifest itself in the midterm election. It is better to have a unified and potent smaller movement than to have a broader movement that does not accomplish the goals. Focused vanguardism is more likely to deliver results than unfocused split-loyalties Trumpist MAGAism that spends its efforts on Israel and ballrooms.
Yeah, but he also clearly just has a personal grudge. This was clear from his Tucker interview that he was extremely upset by the attempted deplatforming by the Israel lobby, and rather than acquiesce he made it his #1 issue out of spite.
He’s funny, he has good takes on some things, but his view that Israel is the most important issue and it’s worth burning it all down to beat the Israel lobby is, in my opinion, deranged and driven by personal grievance more than the logic you describe.
He actually does need to he made irrelevant, not because he’s anti-Semitic, but because he goes out of his way to make Republicans lose, and is very effective at it. And not even over an issue that is actually worthwhile.
I mean, if the issue isn't worthwhile then maybe Republicans should dump Israel
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