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.

Technically by the rules used to track school shootings, they are. Any shooting within X-feet (300?) of a school, at any time of day or night regardless of if the school was in session.

Naturally this lumps in a lot of common urban shootings stemming from 2AM drug deals gone bad.

Does it also include bullets fired by police officers?

I believe so but haven't confirmed. Blip on the chart regardless.

Kids aren't usually shot in drug deals gone bad. I remain skeptical.

16-19 year olds are also "kids" if you look at the statistics, and also near the peak demo for gang shootings. It's procedural manipulation all the way down

This has always annoyed me. I know a few people even IRL who say with a straight face they are afraid to send their kids to school because of not just gun violence but mass shootings specifically. I'm incredulous. First because it remains rare enough that reacting to it, especially in an area as important as basic childhood education, is illogical. It's like developing agoraphobia from lightning strikes, as a lazy example. There are some fears that are unhelpful. Second, by legitimizing this fear, we actually propagate it. Kids are especially sensitive to these kinds of signals from adults, and may go on to develop real, illogical, and damaging fears and phobias based on their legitimization. Which is extra frustrating because some on the left seem at least aware of this on some level, because we are pretty sure that the way the media treats mass shootings is a self-fulfilling prophesy because of the increased number of copy-cat shooters.

According to the Washington Post there have been 413 school shootings since 1999.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/interactive/school-shootings-database/

I would expect that the Post would use the broadest feasible definition. I'm calling this one thoroughly deboonked - it's a regard on twitter, trying to rationalize a non-existent statistic is a waste of time.

No, the Washington Post is actually the most reasonable and conservative school shootings database. It's the one we always point to when the rest of the press use absurd numbers like "over 500 this year!!!"

Jesus Christ this is unpleasant.

Here's CNN quoting 34 school shootings this year.

https://www.cnn.com/us/school-shootings-fast-facts-dg/index.html

Obviously we are more than 34 school days into the year.

I have not seen any statistic even close to one school shooting per day. It is pretty strange to insist repeatedly that this statistic exists without evidence - just link it if it's so obvious.

I'm pretty sure that statistic derives from this joker

Thanks for the link. At 180 school days per year indeed there is plausibly a "school shooting" every day for the past few years, although since there is no graph of deaths it's hard to say if "kids" are plausibly "dying" every day.

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