site banner
ZorbaTHut  1yr ago (text post)   35352 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 Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The ones who had motivation to blow it up. Russians control one end of it, Germans control the other. They have no reason to blow it up because they control the pumping stations.

Ukraine or USA has reason to blow it up and doesn't control the pumping stations.

Ok, I think the conversation went a bit off track.

The original question was why would it be risky for the US to blow it up? My opinion is Biden could basically call Scholz and say "I hope none of your folks are working on these pipelines of yours, because we're blowing them up tomorrow".

If the Germans know who did it, even if they are explicitly told (but off record), what can they do about it?

By the way, what do you make of the theory that it could be the Germans themselves? Turning the pipeline back on would be the obvious demand of any winter-time protestors, and now they can say "gosh darn it, we'd love to, but someone blew both of them up!"

Yes. It's a questionable assumption Germans, no matter how much humiliation and suffering they're forced to endure are going to tolerate American influence and military presence until the very end.

They could do a number of things. Possible lists includes fucking with US installations by legal means, leak secrets, tell police to not go easy on US troops, etc, mandate that pension funds not invest in US markets.

Because if it gets out that the US blew up the pipelines, the risk is that NATO falls apart. If it gets out that the US blew up the pipelines and the German government were complicit, the risk is that the German government falls AND NATO falls apart. The motive you mention is certainly real, but the risks are very high and it would take either desperation or extreme hubris to do it. The US isn't that desperate; the war isn't going well for Russia anyway. Hubris is a possibility, certainly, but I'd say a fairly outside one. Note also that whatever Biden's flaws, "warmonger" does not appear to be among them.

Note also that whatever Biden's flaws, "warmonger" does not appear to be among them.

"Puppet of the MIC" certainly seems to be on the table though...

Maybe, but it would have had to have changed since the Afghanistan withdrawal.

"Don't fuck with us anymore" is within the option-space of messages to take from the Afghanistan withdrawal.

The original question was why would it be risky for the US to blow it up? My opinion is Biden could basically call Scholz and say "I hope none of your folks are working on these pipelines of yours, because we're blowing them up tomorrow".

I prefer to live in an absurd timeline so it is my hope this is what happened and Germany is keeping it quiet because it would be too embarrassing to admit it. Thank you.

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