site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2mo ago (text post)   37743 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 8, 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.

13
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Isn't it likely this was from an air rifle? I assumed from the pictures and sound it actually hit him multiple times and scraped his face but didn't do worse damage.

Allegedly a .22LR.

Whoever tried to shoot him is a fucking idiot, that weapon requires superb shot placement.

Also, the photo of the shooting goes incredibly hard.

That's Time cover of the year material right there. And not the current era Time, but back in the good old days.

That is at least the third coolest reaction to an American presidential assassination attempt. It's probably still behind Teddy Roosevelt's "takes more than that to kill a Bull Moose" but I don't think it tops Andrew Jackson turning the tables on the assassin.

I can't believe Zucc is on Trump's protective detail.

Sounded like a small caliber handgun (9mm or smaller) to me, but it's really hard to tell anything from recorded audio (except that it's supersonic -- you hear the crack of the shockwave before the report). I think an air rifle probably wouldn't have been audible, or only barely so.

Here’s better sound. https://www.themotte.org/post/1070/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/229040

For comparison, a video of what incoming bullets sound like.

Thanks, this makes sense. I had thought the second sound was the sound of Trump getting hit. But now there are reports of bystanders dead so it seems awfully unlikely it was an air rifle.

Sounded rather supersonic to be an air rifle.

Nah, if it was a solitary 'pop' possibly, but the shooter mag dumped after the initial graze.

Currently debating with online gun nerds on what sort of weapon it was.

Three aimed shots, then mag dump. https://www.themotte.org/post/1070/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/229040

What're the thoughts of the gun nerds? Can you link the discussion?

What're the thoughts of the gun nerds?

My thoughts are "for fuck's sake, ammunition and reloading components are about to be sold out and/or scalped again, so if you want a gun or gun-related item it's probably best to buy what you want today before they raise their prices even further beyond the normal election year rush".

it's probably best to buy what you want today before they raise their prices even further beyond the normal election year rush

Is there a typical election year run on guns? Has that always been the case, or only in 2020? As I know nothing about guns, that's not something I ever knew, but even I considerd buying a hand gun in 2020 to prepare for if Trump won (because I was worried that the BLM riots that were already going nuts would soon reach my neighborhood and my home would be in danger if Trump won)

It's been that way since at least Obama's win in 08. The gun culture knows that a Democrat election win means further restrictions are likely, so they go shopping before the election to end-run the potential bans. It's been this way for more than a decade now, every election, and in particularly bad years the shortages are absolutely absurd.

Let's just say I've been waiting to stock up on a lifetime supply between crises for over a decade, and somehow there's always a war, gun ban, or election spiking prices. 5-10x higher than 2011, iirc.

Ah, it's a discord, but the initial reaction was some sort of air rifle. (I thought it was a .22). Mind you, it's only speculation. We'll get to know what happened real soon from the official news, I bet.

shooter mag dumped after

I think that was (multiple members of) security. The shooter's reported dead.

It will be interesting to hear the real report. Either they eliminated the threat in under four seconds or it took 20.

I eagerly await the report of the Blue Ribbon panel in 3-5 years to find out what really happened.

Interesting. That would be weird.

All the news sites seem to be hedging as well. “Possible shooting” “Trump rushes off stage after what sounds like gunshots”.

Why would they hedge like this. Anyone know?

You don't want to print "Donald Trump shot" unless you know that Donald Trump was in fact shot. The known facts are exactly what was printed. The reader can make the inference just as well as the editor.

Presumably media has policies in place for their low-level employees to only print the exact verifiable events (erring on cautiousness) when there's an important breaking story, and then updating later when all the decision makers have rushed in place. Companies are always gonna be a little slower than individual people that can basically watch events live when it comes to that.

I'd expect this happens for the same reason and opposite direction that Everyone Knew from day one that Sarah Palin inspired a spree shooter.

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