site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5mo ago (text post)   27966 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 27, 2024

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.

10
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

To be clear I am criticizing your comment, not the person who you are responding to (I agree they deserve a warning; although blocking someone and then insulting them is IMO cowardice). Yours comes from a mod position and —

[doesn’t] address the actual arguments being made [and] uncharitably projects motives onto them that they have not expressed.

You are implying that I am motivated by “Jew hatred”. But I am not. I have made comments criticizing Islam and mainstream Christianity. Off the top of my head, I think a few months ago I posted about danger of Islam in the West, and some time ago about how bad the “HeGetsUs” campaign was for Christianity. I think I have also made comments about the “religion-ness” of secular progressive America.

I don't recall anyone saying this explicitly

Then I will quote:

Not all people, not all civilizations, not all tribes, are equal. This is a core conservative conceit, it’s also inherent to ideas like HBD that you yourself agree with. Human progress has always involved the conquest of some peoples by others. Punching down’, in other words, may be more moral than ‘punching up’. The many settlers of the Americas did what they did and so, perhaps, will the Israelis.

I suppose it depends on what you mean by “explicit”. Not that the comment deserves to be dinged, but it is an example of how “Jew-hater” does not turn into “Palestinian-hater” when inverted. Even though that comment (clarified in the thread context) implies it is okay to take others’ land if they are less intelligent or developed.

As you do. Constantly.

I don’t think I make many top posts on the topic anymore. The “Jewish billionaire group chat” I felt was of legitimate political and cultural interest. I mostly stick to replying when someone else makes a thread on some issue.

Hating Jews and also having a problem with Muslims and Christians who don't believe the way you think they should are not mutually exclusive.

If 2crafa were regularly starting threads about Palestinians and dropping references to how savage and barbaric they are even when the topic wasn't really about Palestinians, until it was a notable pattern that she really, really likes to talk about how Palestinians are bad, yes, I would conclude she hates Palestinians and has something of an anti-Palestinian agenda. (I mean, she probably doesn't like Palestinians very much, but she doesn't seem to be obsessed with them.)

You're allowed to have an obsession with Jews and feel like it's very important to talk about their "disproportionate power," how they negatively impact society (in your opinion), etc. Other people are allowed to take notice of this, and conclude that you don't like Jews even if you never type the words "I hate Jews."

The poster I responded to got modded because even if one concludes you hate Jews, it's not appropriate to just say "Hey, this guy is a Jew-hater, don't bother talking to him about Jews." But it's not inappropriate to notice when people have axes to grind.

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