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 -
Operation Poseidon Archer
Reported by CNN:
I have mixed feelings about this. It is clearly the responsibility of the imperial hegemon to protect global shipping lanes. But by that same logic, it's time for the imperial hegemon to force a settlement onto the Israelis due to their never-ending destabilization of the region. That would entail the EU forcing a peace onto Israel, performing a Special Military Operation within Israel if necessary.
Bring back the 117 AD borders, with EU administration of Jerusalem. Jews may live in Jerusalem, wail at their wall and study Torah in peace, but it is utterly nonsensical for the West to continue to bear the burden of Israeli destabilization of the region.
This washy middle ground of appealing to imperial obligations when it comes to Middle Eastern intervention, without control of the "vassal" state destabilizing the region, is a never-ending pattern that has to stop. The US and EU has more than enough leverage to force a settlement onto Israel.
I very much disagree with your assessment as to what is destabilizing the region. If not for Israel some other excuse would be made. Stabilization in the Mid East is probably synonymous with aggressive depopulation and/or heavy handed colonialism.
There are stable countries in the middle east. There have been long peacefull periods. Bombing them relentlessly, engaging in regime change and undermining stable regimes has been a disaster. Libya was stable for decades before the neocons decided to have a war and flood Europe with migrants. Syria could have been as stable as Jordan or the UAE if it hadn't been destroyed.
What has created stable states in the middle east is not intervening in them.
You also blame Israel for Syria? Syria had a civil war because Al Assad was shitty at managing his state. The Syrian economy didnt fundamentally improve the lives of its citizens. I remember reading that climate change forced Syrian farmers into cities in Syria. Food prices increased a lot, which led to the Syrian 2011 protests that became a national rebellion.
The Middle East is unstable because its leaders and elites have been shit at managing their states. This leads to major rebellions and wars. This is why there was a rebellion against Gaddafi in Libya and Al Assad in Syria. The French went into Libya because of a mix of morality and wanting to maintain power over their former colonial holdings. Not neocon interventionism on behalf of Israel.
Sanctions, Israeli bombing of Libya and Israeli support for jihadist groups did not help at all. Israel has clearly seen Syria as an enemy and has done its best for decades to undermine and destroy Syria.
Why do these rebels end up with air support and expensive weapons? Who trains these militias? How did thousands of mercenaries show up in Libya and why was Libya bombed to pieces from the sky? The countries in the middle east that haven't been bombed are more stable, more peaceful, don't have massive outflows of refugees and are far better to live in than the ones destroyed by interventionists who attend AIPAC conferences.
Jordan, Egypt, the UAE and Saudi is stable. Iran is unusually stable for a country that has fought a major war and has had a neighboring country invaded three times in the past decades.
When did Israel bomb Libya? Your making stuff up. Sanctions on Libya were because of French neocolonial and Western morality, Same with Syria.
Israel did also not train Jihadist groups in Syria. It at most, provided medical support for anyone who came to the border. Which included Syrian civilians. The West backing the Free Syrian Army was because of Western morality and some love for Western democracy. Not Israel.
You really believe Israel is the answer for all of this? Dont you see you have a ton of regional actors like the Gulf States, Iran, Algeria, Egypt or even far away regional actors like France or Russia? They are the ones who provide weapons and training. Look at Sudan currently and the RSF vs the Sudanese govt. The RSF is gaining support militarily from the UAE. While the Sudanese govt gains support from Saudi Arabia. Its a proxy conflict between them. Nothing to do with Israel.
Your looking for Israel to be the answer for why the Middle East is unstable. Its not. The Middle East is unstable because of the Middle Easts characteristics. The West projecting their values on the Middle East doesnt help. Its not the Israelis making Libya rise up against Gaddafi nor against Assad. Its not the Israelis that make Jihadist groups or political Islam attractive. Its more likely extreme religiosity and poverty.
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