site banner
ZorbaTHut  1yr ago (text post)   35368 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 26, 2022

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.

26
Top New Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Well if you envision it as a game of chicken, the exchange has gone something like this:

EU: Stop invading Ukraine, or at least do it more quietly, or we're going to stop buying gas

RF: You're bluffing. You won't stop buying gas, you'll freeze to death. You don't care about the Ukies that much. Give us your money and shut up.

EU: We totally will stop buying gas, even if the poor freeze, we're Americans now we don't care about the poor. We're going to stop buying gas altogether in three months time. Three months time and you're cut off, no more money.

RF: Well, fine, fuck you, no more NS1 pipeline right now. "Maintenance" you know? See if you can hold up your end of the bargain.

Seen in this light, with Russia having recently called the EU's bluff by cutting off gas supplies early, it could make sense that a Western aligned actor attacked the pipeline for the purpose of calling Russia's bluff, "We don't need your stinking pipeline, in fact watch us blow it up." On the theory that Russia, realizing that pipeline diplomacy won't work, will be forced to settle for a lesser deal. Or it could be an escalation of Russia's earlier calling the EUs bluff, hoping to inspire panic in energy markets that will lead to cracks in the pro-war coalition in the West.

Not sure either plan will work. Both sides are far too organized to respond to intimidation in that way.

Well if you envision it as a game of chicken, the exchange has gone something like this:

EU: Stop invading Ukraine, or at least do it more quietly, or we're going to stop buying gas

RF: You're bluffing. You won't stop buying gas, you'll freeze to death. You don't care about the Ukies that much. Give us your money and shut up.

I approve of the game of chicken metaphor, but raise that it doesn't need to be a game of chicken between EU and RF, but could be between Germany and other members of the EU (or NATO) trying to constrain Germany's options.

While unlikely, it could also be an action by someone else trying to constraint Russia's options. As in- 'Russia, don't put your hopes on the Germans breaking ranks, they can't do so now.'

I approve of the game of chicken metaphor, but raise that it doesn't need to be a game of chicken between EU and RF, but could be between Germany and other members of the EU (or NATO) trying to constrain Germany's options.

Why not both? The benefits can be multi-faceted.

Euro gas futures markets have been chilling out for a bit, ironically.

The reason why it doesn't make much sense as Russian bluff/escalation is that the only important costs borne by Germany are political costs -- the cost of making difficult, painful, but ultimately strategically correct decisions. Taking that decision out of German hands is a gift. Blowing the pipeline ends the game, no more concessions to be extracted or cracks to leverage. However much Germans suffer this winter is of vastly less strategic import to Russia than the unified front of sanctions against it. That suffering is only a chip to be traded for relief on the latter, and is near useless on its own.

However much Germans suffer this winter is of vastly less strategic import to Russia than the unified front of sanctions against it. That suffering is only a chip to be traded for relief on the latter, and is near useless on its own.

I'd go so far as to say that German suffering is actively a bad thing for Russia. The goal of the game of chicken isn't to crash your opponent's car, it is to get him to swerve first. Both sides are attempting to show that they are indifferent to the suffering inflicted by cutting off trade, which is considerable on both sides. See the series of planted talking points stories in Western outlets recently, about how "actually Russian sanctions evasion in third countries is the ideal outcome for NATO because it stabilizes energy markets while forcing Russia to sell at a discount."

What better way to show that you are indifferent to the flow of gas being cut off than bombing the pipeline? It can be repaired for a few billion, the gain of your opponent folding in the face of your massive bluff is much higher.

The conspiracy theory I'm seeing is that it's Putin's way of not giving anyone who seeks to replace him a way out. If the pipelines are destroyed and Europe becomes energy-independentish then there's no way for a successor to make a rapprochement take things back to normal. Ship goes down with the captain.

If the pipelines are destroyed and Europe becomes energy-independentish

Not happening. Barring the discovery of some brand new too-cheap-to-meter form of energy generation. there's no way for Europe to become energy independent without a dramatic decrease in quality of life, energy usage and/or population.

They could power up the decommissioned nuclear plants, stop cutting production, and start fracking like there's no tomorrow. But they won't.

Very unconvincing to me, not least because Putin has been incredibly risk-adverse and reticent to do anything that could be construed as escalatory as far as Nato is concerned.

I'm not averse to blaming Russia, but that's way too complicated.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats