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 -
This is a Chesterson's Fence situation. We decided that it was Very Enlightened to not care about things like aesthetics, building giant statues, or verbalizing imperial ambitions in polite company (you are supposed to couch your imperial ambitions in terms of Saving Democracy and Spreading Freedom, much more progressive and enlightened). But without those things, it's pretty damn hard to maintain an empire. Take something like Demographic change. Is it possible for us to let go of the grug-brain attachment to flags and statues without committing demographic suicide and losing the empire? Apparently not.
I don't know, Texas is American, isn't it? Mexican-American war seems like a win, and had we kept that kind of attitude for another century, we'd have Cuba, too.
The Americans failed to take [the two major colonies that would later form] Canada in the war of 1812.
Granted, that territory is actually really defensible given there's no land border within 2000 miles that grants access to any major city (and invading through the wilderness of what is now Western Ontario would have been so incredibly difficult that it might as well have been impassable). Your supply chain can't happen unless you pull a China and construct so many ferries across the water that the enemy can't sink them all- an invasion of those colonies would have had to be reinforced by sea, and convoys would have a long journey ahead of them given they have to transit all the way around Nova Scotia into the St. Lawrence.
Mexico (and importantly, the southern US) is different- yeah, the terrain might take a while to traverse, but it is ultimately still able to be traversed (even in the winter). Its strategic position would thus be a lot more perilous (and that attempt to shore it up- what you can defend and what you can't- is why the borders look the way they do. The Texan border with Mexico is not the Big River for no reason).
More options
Context Copy link
Texas was not part of Mexico at the time of the Mexican-American war and had petitioned for membership in the USA prior to the war kicking off.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Can the American empire survive as an economic-proposition state? I don't think so. It has to have more glorious ambitions than that.
Actually I'm pretty comfortable calling that outcome - America loses. There's not enough time to make up for the manufacturing shortfall, and that manufacturing shortfall is so massively brutal that not even the US' slight technical edge will make up for it (if that technical edge is even still there in a decade, which is debatable too).
China has a material advantage in the local theater, but the best it can hope for is getting its neighbors to commit to neutrality (and at least Japan will not, and it still has meaningful shipyards). The US also can shut down Malacca.
Everyone's economy will be f'ed, but if China can't win in the span of ~9 months, it has lost. That said, I don't reject the possibility of it winning in that duration: there are just too many uncertainties to call an outcome.
China has, according to the US Navy, over 230x the shipbuilding capacity of the US. The technical edge? The US doesn't even have that anymore - the Kinzhal missiles they purchase from their now extremely close ally Russia are better than the equivalent western hypersonic. I'm not going to comment on the financial aspect, because I have no idea how much of either the US or Chinese economy is hallucinatory (except that it isn't zero for either).
More options
Context Copy link
My suspicion is that within a couple weeks it will be clear who has the technological edge, and whoever does will win the war. And no one in the world has concrete knowledge of even how one side's weapons will fare, let alone both's.
It will certainly be interesting to see what technologies both countries have up their sleeves when pushed to the limit.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
You don't even need a rival, you just need some sort of vision. What is America's vision beyond an economic zone? It's extremely lackluster. So Goodguy can say "nobody cares about imperial aesthetics anymore", but maybe that is a big part of the problem, and the reason the citizens are increasingly feeling detached and pessimistic and demoralized...
Touché, but Manifest Destiny was more than that. It was conquest, Gold, God, and Glory. A civilization only thrives in the act of becoming. Keeping the lights on within an economic zone is not that.
And Gold was slapped down pretty hard in the 60-70s, and God was dead by the 90's. That leaves conquest, which we've all decided is illegal for whatever reason. We need a new combo, and "Cash, Grass, and Ass" doesn't seem to be cutting it.
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