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 condemnation, as Nybbler says (and again this is in Ackman’s Twitter post) is because they’re unwilling to actually commit to freedom of speech. They want their exceptions for discourse around trans issues or HBD, but then when it’s POC vs Jews, they want to be able to sit back and say they’re just following the spirit of the first amendment.
You can't divorce the discussion from the fact that Israel is slaughtering thousands of Gazan civilians, and it's especially rich that Jews have been able to force the discourse on an alleged call to genocide with a run-of-the-mill propaganda slogan like "Palestinians will be free in Palestine," when such slogans are common to every war in human history. We should be left in awe that they've been able to steer the discourse to pearl-clutching around that slogan while they openly endorse an ongoing ethnic cleansing. None of the hypocrisy you are trying to identify here between "POC vs Jews" on the free speech question can possibly hold a candle to the hypocritical Elite support for Zionist brutality. The fact this has been made an issue proves Jews are on the top of the pyramid, above and beyond the POC, and the kvetching over this controversy is just proof of that fact and not at all proof that Jews are put upon.
Slaughtering, to me, seems like a highly incorrect use of the word. They are incidentally killing people in Gaza, some tiny percentage of which are civilians, most of whom are in the crossfire because they are being used as human shields by agents of Hamas, a foreign military operation that just conducted an act of aggression in Israel.
It seems rather likely to me that a large percentage are civilians, given how much Hamas tries to hide itself with civilians and inside civilian structures. Which doesn’t make the IDF’s collateral damage any less moral, in my opinion.
Oh I disagree. You can't have such a standard practice without willing participation of the vast majority of the population. Almost everyone over age 10 knows why they are there and is agreeing to it.
That may well be, but supporting the military doesn’t make you a combatant, or else the civilian/combatant distinction would be virtually meaningless in the vast majority of cases.
Yes I agree that the civilian/combatant distinction is useless in the vast majority of cases. I further assert most people asserted to be Palestinian Civilians would fail all but the most lenient tests if given a questionnaire with a perfect truth detector.
Now that’s interesting! Do you believe that there’s much of a point at all then, to making targeting civilians a war crime? Do you see the Oct 7 attack on Israeli civilians as a justified part of war-making?
Targeting how? Am I bombing a football stadium during gametime with a MOAB? Sure. Give that Colonel or Major the death penalty after the war.
But almost always when it is applicable, its a street level thing where you are operating with near zero info, often nowadays soldiers are intentionally dressing as civilians, and "civilians" are running interference for their local boys. In that case, blow the whole block and I don't see where the crime is. If I am "supporting" the military with a vote, I also am not a civilian, because the purpose of voting is to avoid internal civil wars. But that is not a good standard for the other side to try and figure out. So just lay off women and children that are in basements where there are no other men at all. If any men want to profess equal amounts of non-participation they should begin a military resistance movement against the government that they do not support.
Edit I forgot this part
Not really. They didn't make any real attempts to target IDF soft targets. They just targeted the equivalent of a football stadium, a concert. They also actively fled engagement with IDF instead, fleeing them, and targeting residences where they had zero reason to expect to particularly find IDF resources. Also, it was a surprise attack. I don't subscribe to the idea that you have to hamstring yourself in war, like a lot of progressives seem to think Great Britain/USA/Israel/France should do, but it does show a certain lack of courage. Combined with their cowardly appeals to the UN/western progressives for a ceasefire since 10/7 I think it betrays a guilty mind of a people who know they are not conducting themselves in a way compatible with being considered members of a human society.
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