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.

Interestingly, the New York Post describes the shooter as “a Chinese man.”

Not sure what to make of that, but that seems to me to be a strike against theories of “antifa” and “right-wing schizo”, although obviously more info is needed. (Do they mean “Chinese-American” or “a Chinese national?)

So does this qualify as a new correlation of Sailer's Law? K>W is white, W>K is Black, W=K is Chinese?

It would be very fitting for the Chinese to be the embodiment of perfect balance.

The Middle Killdom.

Post updated it to say 'white male'. Disappointing that we won't kick off 2025 with a declaration of war against China 'for trying to get at me'.

The only question now is leftist, psycho or deep state. My money is 50/40/10. I put no money on foreign assassin, but it'll be fucking wild if it is.

100% on psycho but

30% leftist

20% Muslim

20% Identifiably right wing

5% Christian extremist

25% total dingbat

I confess to forgetting about muslims. If its a palestinian (black haired man, so not a small chance its an arab) with a social media history of pro-palestinian leanings I will fucking laugh. I think an attempt will be made to make the shooter right wing regardless of leaning, like how Europe defines muslim antisemitism as right wing because islamism is a right wing ideology according to the authorities. In this case if the shooter at any point expressed concerns about state overreach he will be cast as right wing, if the fact that he held a gun without bursting into flames isn't enough for that label to be thrown.

If its MUSLIM, fully expect it to be entirely memory holed and for endless pro-islam marches to be made. Pulse nightclub is now cast as a right wing incel attack, and the Fort Hood and DC sniper attacks are also forgotten. Fuck even 911 is forgotten by leftists who find it irritating that America dared to strike back against brown terrorists.

I honestly doubt its a right wing gun nut. Any gun enthusiast will know that a .22 is a joke round and will go for .223, 30-06 or .308 for an assassination. Someone using a .22 seems just bafflingly incompetent.

As someone who doesn’t know about guns, what’s the difference? And why not the common 5.56 round?

.223 is just a cheaper generic version of 5.56. .223 is technically a lower pressure round than a 5.56 but they're interchangeable in any firearm chambered for them.

.22 is a small round not recommended for using to shoot at anything bigger than a squirrel. A sniper in particular should be using a deer cartridge like .308(the standard US military sniper round) or 30-06, both of which are substantially bigger and more powerful rounds than a .223 which is more powerful than .22.

Simplified version: 5.56 is .223, 5.56 uses the same bullet as .22 but throws it a lot faster. Speed makes aiming way easier, and just like in car accidents, speed kills.

And why not the common 5.56 round?

We don't know yet. Shooters of this type tend to be shockingly incompetent (generally because there are other things wrong with them)- and making aiming harder in a life-or-death situation and using a round that isn't sufficiently powerful is incompetence.

5.56 uses the same bullet as .22

I think you meant to say .223.

No, .22 and 5.56 use what is, functionally, the same projectile; the simplest explanation for 5.56 is just a .22 with anger issues.

Sure, the projectile for 5.56 needs to be pointier and covered in copper so it doesn't disintegrate due to spinning at ~300,000 RPM, but it's not meaningfully different in terms of weight (from "slightly heavier" at 55-62 grains to "exactly the same" at 40) and identical in terms of diameter.

22 and 556 bullets are not interchangeable. They are shaped significantly differently, despite the similar nominal diameter. One is a little nub like a pencil eraser. The other is a long pointy spike.

The bullet is very, very, very different. Like twice as heavy for one thing, 30-40 grains vs 55 to 90 grains.
Plus 223s are engineered for controlled fragmentation while your average 22 is, uh, a lead blob with some copper painted on, lightly crimped into a case. The ones I buy in 1k buckets wobble and can be pulled with multitool pliers.

More comments

.223 is, essentially, 5.56. There's some variations between the two as .223 specifications were developed by civilians and 5.56 specifications were written by the military, but it's essentially the same round for most practical purposes, and most guns can fire most loadings of the two rounds interchangably.

.22 refers to .22 Long Rifle, an extremely weak round used for hunting rabbits and target shooting. The .22 LR has the same bore diameter as a .223/5.56, but has a significantly shorter and lighter bullet, and fires it at significantly lower velocity; 1000 feet per second, rather than the 3000 feet per second of the later. .22 LR would be an extremely poor choice for an attempted sniper assassination; it's plenty accurate at a hundred yards, but the low velocity means bullet drop, wind drift, and lethal effect are all greatly reduced. A perfectly-centered .22 shot to the head from a hundred yards has a so-so chance of killing the target. Anything less than perfectly centered and it's entirely possible the round would deflect off the skull or fail to penetrate into the brain.

By contrast, a perfectly-centered 5.56 to the head from a hundred yards is a modulo-certain instant kill, and has a decent chance of literally blowing their head apart from the hydraulic force of the impact.

.22 LR would be an extremely poor choice for an attempted sniper assassination

Reminds me how this is a plot point in Day of the Jackal, where the assassin deliberately picks explosive rounds to make up for it.

To add on to this, @mdurak, 5.56 is basically .223 described in international-standard (rather than American) terms, in order to aid military standardisation among NATO. .223 means "0.223 inches across the rifle barrel, in the rifling grooves" - imperial measurements and the American practice of measuring calibre across the grooves. 5.56 means "5.56 mm across the rifle barrel, not in the grooves" - metric measurements and the international practice of measuring calibre across the ungrooved parts of the barrel (the "lands"). (5.56 mm is, as you might expect, very slightly less than 0.223 inches.)

I honestly doubt its a right wing gun nut. Any gun enthusiast will know that a .22 is a joke round and will go for .223, 30-06 or .308 for an assassination. Someone using a .22 seems just bafflingly incompetent.

It was a .223, was it not?

If it was an AR platform, yes.

BTW Nobody shoots 30-06 anymore.

People who have 30-06 caliber rifles shoot 30-06. It's just that the two main choices in an AR platform rifle, unless you happen to be a gun nut, are .223 and .308.

Saw people here say .22, so I ran with that. Updated info points to AR style, so bushmaster XM15 is the most likely candidate just for availability. So, .223.

Also, boo on 30-06 not being fired anymore. Military doesn't, true, but home pressers usually load up .308 or 30-06. Admittedly I haven't been in the scene for years, but all the small town rednecks who pivoted away from walmart supplies during the 2020 ammo shortage swear by their old reliable hunting rugers.

Also, boo on 30-06 not being fired anymore.

.30-06 is obsoleted by .308 on the low end (and in most tactical/fighting rifles) and .300 Winchester Magnum on the high end (and in hunting rifles).

Modern gunmakers, when designing hunting rifles, build their receivers for the physically largest cartridge they'll offer first. .300 Win Mag is that cartridge, so if you buy that rifle in .30-06 you're taking a rifle that's already sized for a more powerful cartridge and, well, nerfing it. And when hunting, people generally welcome the extra power, since you only really want to take (and frequently, only get) one shot.

As for .308, there's no .30-06 Pmag, and why would a manufacturer reinvent the wheel when a different company has already designed it for them? And if you're designing a hunting rifle with its own custom magazine, the above point applies.

Don't worry, though. If it makes you feel any better, in the next 20 years all .30 caliber cartridges will be obsoleted by a hybrid-case high-pressure .308-sized round that delivers .300 Win Mag performance, and I don't believe any mass-market cartridge is going to bother going higher because .300 Win Mag is already at the upper limit of human recoil tolerance.

.300M sounds interesting, never fired that. My experience is oriented to a pretty specific niche, with a period of extremely fun mag dumping 12.7 and 7.62 surplus. Only plonked marksman rifles at a ranch with some buddies in the 2010s and thats when I discovered an appreciation for .308 and 30-06 guns and a deep loathing of .22LR plinkers.

More comments

Point of pedantry, but the AR platform covers just about every commercially available cartridge, from .17 rimfire to .50 BMG.

It was probably a .223/5.56mm, but the AR platform is extremely popular and absurdly diverse.

The first discussion I had brought Muslim front of mind, because I wasn't really upset by it and my friend said come on its a big deal, and I said hey Trump's had people assassinated turnabout is fair play. So like the first discussion I had was if it would be valid by the USAs own interpretation of international law for Iran to kill Trump.

Also not all right wingers are gun nuts.

I think if it was any variety of right wing or Christian we would have heard by now.

How? I don't even think there's a name yet

Eta: I should note that two different baptist friends have told me in recent weeks that based on biblical prophecy their bible study groups think Trump might be the antichrist. Just a weird thing that's going around I guess, I wasn't sure what to make of it.

I should note that two different baptist friends have told me in recent weeks that based on biblical prophecy their bible study groups think Trump might be the antichrist.

Interesting -- are the evangelical elements of the red tribe shifting against him?

I guess my response is, of course he's the antichrist, have you seen the guy talk about his relationship with the divine and how his most ardent supporters talk about him? But then again, I also think Joe Biden, Vladimir Putin, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Henry VIII, Peter the Great, and of course the OG Nero are the antichrist, there are many of them. So that's not a particularly spectacular claim for me to make.

The actually-religious parts of the republican base are consistently the last people to line up behind Trump who will ultimately do so anyways.

Amusingly enough, it is true that Moscow "sits on many waters", and it was, at least under the USSR, "drunk with the blood of the saints".

I'm not really sure if it even means they aren't voting for him! Some prophetically inclined evangelicals seem to be interested in triggering the end times, what with Israel and red heifers and whatnot. Although my impression is that one is always choosing sides against the antichrist even if his coming it's inevitable and ultimately welcome.

I'm not really sure if it even means they aren't voting for him!

Reminds me of the Lizardman's Constant post.

"Well, on the one hand, Obama is the Anti-Christ. On the other, do I really want four years of Romney?"

Moreso that a lot of prophecy-obsessed prots want to trigger the end times and the kingdom of heaven.

Revelation 13:3…

I am 90% on psycho, but only 60% on obviously psycho given what comes out. The guy is dead, so we won't have a prison psychiatrist's report. This is unfortunate, because the guy turning out to be unfit-to-plead level mentally ill like the guy who shot Reagan would defuse things a bit.

I just think people tend to weirdly equate "identifiable ideological point" with "rational" and that's silly. One can be a psycho for Islam or Mainstream Democratic politics or for the Dallas cowboys.

Interestingly, the New York Post describes the shooter as “a Chinese man.”

As of now, it is (emphasis added):

The gunman believed to have been behind the attempted assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump Saturday was shot and killed by Secret Service, sources told The Post.

The shooter, identified only as a white male, was in a sniper position located hundreds of yards away from Trump’s podium in Butler, Pa. as he spoke to a campaign crowd, sources said.

About 120 m or so, not hundreds of yards.

Really close.

NSFW, gore warning: picture of the shooter.

/images/17209263241078749.webp

Whats up with his cauliflower ear? Damage to the skull underneath?

down and left of his ear is what appears to be the rim of a catastrophic exit wound. Pretty sure that guy is missing a good portion of the lower-right quadrant of his skull.

He got domed by the secret service Counter Assault Team within seconds of opening up. They couldn't prevent the attack, but their reaction was incredible.

One of my first thoughts upon seeing this was "I wonder if this is real or AI generated", and that's a scary thought. I wonder if fake images of this event will soon be circulating.

Young man, scruffy unkempt hair, peach fuzz. Skinny-fat vibes. Certainly fits the antifa stereotype, but not much to go on. If this is real, then it's incredible it got out so soon.

If Shaggy decided to become an assassin instead of solving mysteries with his talking dog.

You need decent cognitive skills to draw blood on such a well-guarded target. The takes calling the shooter a retard are, well, retarded. We've seen what it looks like when mentally ill people try to assassinate Trump. It's pathetic.

A caution: "mentally ill" is a very broad term, much broader than "retarded". You can be plenty intelligent and planning-capable and also anxious or depressed. Not even all psychotics are as useless as Sandford; Kaczynski was probably mildly psychotic and he lasted almost two decades.

Reminder that a literal 65 IQ* retard shot 32 people inside 90 seconds, killing 20, in the Broad Arrow café & gift shop.

In the café itself:

From the first shot, all of these events took approximately fifteen seconds, during which Bryant fired seventeen shots, killed twelve people, and wounded ten more

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Bryant

Reading the article, it's possible that he wasn't nearly that stupid, of more 'average' intelligence yet mentally odd enough that he didn't care to learn to read or do well on any test. He may have killed his father and the heiress who was (presumably) sleeping with him.

Well we all know, hopefully, how first accounts during live news go. Crazy amounts of bullshit. But anyway, checking wiki to see if there's been any U.S President assassination attempts since Squeaky Fromme on Ford, there's been a surprising amount. I guess the media decided to not report these things. Though it's hard to tell how serious all the listed are.

But the point is, the examples of the lesser known recent assassination attempts sound very schizo. Random Chinese man wouldn't actually be out of the theme. I like this one:

Joe Biden: May 23, 2023: Sai Varshith Kandula, a 19-year-old man from St. Louis, drove a rented box truck into a barrier that separated the White House grounds from the public. Shortly thereafter he was taken into custody by the United States Park Police and was found to have a Nazi flag in his truck. Kandula expressed admiration for the Third Reich and stated his intentions were to "kill the president" and "seize power".[128]

My favorite is Ronald Gene Barbour in 1994. He was driving to commit suicide at a particular destination, but missed his exit and decided he might as well continue on the highway all the way to Washington DC and shoot Bill Clinton. As it happened, Clinton was overseas at the time, so Barbour gave up, went home, and wound up telling a friend (and the friend's tape recorder) all about it.

But anyway, checking wiki to see if there's been any U.S President assassination attempts since Squeaky Fromme on Ford

A rather famous one on Reagan, by a random schizo attempting to impress Jodie Foster (she wasn't impressed).

There's been a previous attempt on Trump (as candidate, in 2016), though it didn't get as far as shots being fired.

I think I've heard people say she kind of was impressed.

It'd be kind of funny if they raid his home just to find pictures of Jodie Foster plastered all over the walls. That might be the best possible outcome of all this.

Rooftop chinese would certainly BTFO my prediction.

Interviewee says he saw the guy on a roof and reported him: https://x.com/SharpFootball/status/1812265909727396107

I watched that and his disbelief that Secret Service didn't have those roofs covered. I'm assuming Trump has a much smaller SS detail than he would have had while he was president, right? I understand that former presidents and presidential campaigners get some degree of SS coverage, but is their detail really big enough to station agents on all of the roofs in a small town, like this guy seems to have expected?

https://apnews.com/article/trump-vp-vance-rubio-7c7ba6b99b5f38d2d840ed95b2fdc3e5

According to this (and the "all clear" in the video), they killed the shooter in seconds. I guess it could just be a really tight window between him popping up and opening fire?

Edit: here's a video with the guy's corpse in his shooting position.

But drones with cameras are cheap. Couldn't the Secret Service have easily had eyes on all the rooftops within sniper range?

There may be an issue with drones that, if you have several of your own drones flying around for security, it's much harder to spot an unauthorized drone that may be up to no good.

From some of the pics, it looks like some of the security detail was from local police, so maybe a core SS detail coordinates with local law enforcement for events like these, which means using teams that are not necessarily accustomed to the scope of sweep needed for events like this?

Suicide drones are a bigger threat than shooters, so public security officials prefer to lock down the airspace entirely, and current practices prefer clean air to ease identification of assets, using tethered drones for station keeping in fixed positions (so visual rotations, not patrols, and both are insufficient to cover a 1km radius without 9 or more teams). No Unmanned Traffic Management system exists yet, and these opt-in systems cannot handle uncooperative elements.

Interesting, thanks. Then shouldn't the Secret Service have placed fixed cameras on all the roofs in shooting range that they didn't plan to have men on?

Installing temporary cameras is actually super irritating and most agents on the ground prefer to walk and use their eyes instead of fiddling with cameras. An agent in an elevated position can just turn his head to scan a sector, then walk 8 meters and see another sector. Temporary cameras streaming to a command post have relatively low resolution for transmission ease, and can't move. You need to spam a shitload of cameras, and therefore spam a shitload of observers. A command post can only stuff so many bodies in it and comms overload is something to be guarded against.

Update: I saw the map of the shooting. I take back my above regarding observer spam. The entire site is practically empty with the firing position being literally the closest point to target with direct line of sight, and no clutter or surplus of alternative angles of attack. There is no excuse for this magnitude of failure. This isn't a rally at a factory or a town center with a shitload of positions to consider, its a fucking open field. An absolute failure by SS to secure this barest of bare minimums.

I'm not sure what I expected, but Chinese wasn't it.

Presumably they must have identified him by nationality or they'd just say Asian.

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