site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4mo ago (text post)   37982 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.

Yes, an agent(?) said the shooter was dead before they left the stage. As far as I can tell, there still hasn't been official confirmation, but anonymous officials are repeating it.

EDIT: adding more

video link, just before the shots

6:50-6:58, 7:07 Shots fired

7:32 "he's down", "Shooter's down."

I'm curious if the agents shot the would-be-assassin with that last shot. It sounded the same as the rest, but I don't think gunshots are that distinct based on angle and caliber.

My guess would be the second-to-last shot is the Secret Service sniper shooting the would-be assassin, and the last shot after several seconds delay is them putting a very carefully-aimed second round into him to confirm the kill.

video link, just before the shots

The woman in the right corner at just after 9 minutes who transitions from shouting "USA! USA! USA!" to "FUCK YOU! FUCK YOU! FUCK YOU!" is a perfect ecapsulation of the ugliness of the current American body politic.

That was the USs response to Pearl Harbor also. And 9/11.

The immediate aftermath of 9-11 in the US (and this is my memory, so take that fwiw) was one of self-sacrifice and attending the victims, as well as giving accolades to the first responders. Most attention was on the NYFD and NYPD (in the what seems like a bizarro world now, when Rudy Giuliani was seen as heroic). It was an interesting time, when a lot of people in the US showed their very best qualities. I can clearly remember the backlash from my good ol boy acquaintances to Bush's comments that the terrorists were "cowards."

Of course soon enough this all gave way to a more palpable desire for justice, revenge, etc. But that wasn't the first reaction.

The immediate aftermath of 9-11 in the US (and this is my memory, so take that fwiw) was one of self-sacrifice and attending the victims, as well as giving accolades to the first responders.

My personal, immediate reaction was "we're going to bomb the shit out of whoever did this."

My personal, immediate reaction was "we're going to bomb the shit out of whoever did this."

I remember my dad's first words in response to seeing the news: "Well, we're going to war with somebody now."

Or to put it another way, it was "common-sense country control".

(It was certainly as successful in the long term as everything else common sense demands we control.)

That seems like an appropriate response to a prospective assassin. It's not like the crowd is attacking the dignity and respect that he should have.

Pro work. Good job whoever downed him.

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