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 -
The reality is that Israel has created millions of refugees, is creating havoc in the region and waves of migrants toward Europe. They are expanding and clearly have ambitions to grow their country. The Palestinians are well within their rights to fight back. Israel is a permanent threat to its neighbours, who aren't going anywhere. There is no guarantee of peace for Israel's neighbors as long as Israel is a militarized and aggressive nation. As long as Israel is blocking Gaza, killing hundreds of civilians a year and conducting air strikes on Gaza they have every reason to continue fighting. For us in Europe it would be a major win to not have Israel stir up chaos on our border.
The Palestinian population is approaching the population of Algeria in 1960 with Israel having a population that has a large component of religious fanatics who can't fight and combined with one of the scrawniest populations around. There is absolutely strong reasons to believe an insurgency could win.
I can see how Palestinians have a right to fight for what they want: some issues aren't able to be resolved by dialog because of irreconcilable values, and violence is the only solution. But once you believe there's a legitimate war going on, both sides have the right to commit violence. I don't see the current bombing and invasion of Gaza as furthering Israel's interests, but I also don't see destroying enemies who want to destroy you as something that makes Israel worthy of condemnation: they're responding like any state would, just as Palestinians are responding like any colonized indigenous population in the same circumstances would.
Algeria is an interesting comparison, but I think it breaks down. Algeria could be ethnically cleansed of Frenchmen because they were a numerical minority, they had a place to go and, critically, the existence of the French state wasn't threatened. The same isn't true of Israel, which suggests that a Palestinian insurgency to ethnically cleanse Israel of Jews is more likely to fail.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link