site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5mo ago (text post)   23862 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 10, 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.

7
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I think that they have a point. Voters are not obliged to hold their nose and vote for a candidate that they find reprehensible. I myself rarely vote. And I also think that refusing to vote can send it's own message. If the Greens got 10% of the popular vote they wouldn't win,but it would definitely shift the political window and demonstrate that there are lots of dissatisfied voters out there for the taking. Similarly if turnout was to decline precipitously, it would also be read as a political signal.

I say this but I also think that to tie your vote to the affairs of Israel and Palestine is very wacky.

Voters are not obliged to hold their nose and vote for a candidate that they find reprehensible. I myself rarely vote. And I also think that refusing to vote can send it's own message.

I don't personally disagree with you. But I'm not one of these people who thought Trump was literally Hitler 4 years ago. These people I'm posting about definitely are those people. Unless they actually think that Biden is literally Hitler this time around, then it doesn't make sense for them to vote Green.

And I really don't buy that they actually think Biden is as bad as they thought Trump was from 2016 to 2020. If they do, that points to another crazy phenomenon, the fact that they are so disconnected with their past, and with the people who they supposedly felt were most harmed by Trump from 2016 through 2020, as to be willing to throw them under the bus this time.

I don't think this is that crazy. My impression, which might be wrong, is that a lot of the Trump/Hitler crowd is actually from the mainstream left, and The hard left voices that are withholding their votes from Biden took the position that sure, Trump was horrible, but he was just saying openly what Republicans always believed.

The hard left voices that are withholding their votes from Biden took the position that sure, Trump was horrible, but he was just saying openly what Republicans always believed.

That sentiment does not match up with anyone I know personally. Even if they felt Trump was saying things many Republicans believed, they still all thought Trump was a megomaniac who would seize power for himself, ruin our institutions, and start an apartheid state, and that's something I never heard anyone worry about from Mitt Romney.

You might have heard it, but it was certainly being said. No less than Joe Biden stumped that a Romney Administration would see African-Americans in chains in what was a pretty obvious slavery allusion to a mostly black audience.

Mainstream Democratic-aligned narratives in the period was that a Romney victory would be dystopian disaster. The nature of the dystopia varied by the message and audience- it could be a corporatist, religious extremist, but bigotry was an expected component, to the point that 'binders full of women' became a proof of sexism he would bring into government.

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