site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4mo ago (text post)   38814 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 15, 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.

9
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Which is the correct position to take for someone who is pro-democracy and thinks Trump is a threat to democracy? Should they be pro or anti assassination? You seem to be simultaneously mocking both stances.

I think there are a bunch of mockable positions here.

There's the people who actually think Trump is Hitler reincarnated. For one, that's really dumb and worthy of ridicule. Two, it's idiotic to publicly state this since if it turns out you're correct, you get a free trip to a concentration camp.

The people who say Trump is Hitler for their two minutes hate, but then weathervane into pearl clutching when someone almost kills him are huge hypocrites and absolutely should be mocked.

As for cancellation, I don't support or participate in it, I'm a staunch free speech advocate. I think in most cases (especially in cases like the home depot cashier above) nothing you say on a social media platform should cost you your job. That said, the left has been wielding cancellation like a war hammer for the last decade, so it's a lot of fun to watch the leopards eat their faces.

This isn't an answer to my question.

Which is the correct position to take for someone who is pro-democracy and thinks Trump is a threat to democracy? Should they be pro or anti assassination?

Anti.

Trump being a potential or likely future threat to democracy is wrong but it isn’t schizo. If you undertake a policy of just assassinating everyone that codes as a potential Erdogan or Mugabe then you don’t have a democracy, because the false positive rate is too high. Instead it becomes justifiable to assassinate positive current threats to democracy- eg Hitler right after the reichstag fire, not during coalition negotiations.

Yeah this is where I land as well. Which is why it irks me to see people going "haha they says he's literally Hitler but also saying the assassination attempt was bad, they're clearly full of shit." No, it's that crossing the line of embracing political violence and murder is a serious thing and most people won't do that lightly.

What is the correct position for somebody who is pro democracy but doesn’t think that people who disagree with him should be allowed to vote?

It’s just an incoherent question along the lines of “can god microwave a burrito so hot that even he cannot lift it?”

It’s just an incoherent question

It is coherent question with coherent answer.

"What is democracy?"

"Democracy is when we win!"

Two, it's idiotic to publicly state this since if it turns out you're correct, you get a free trip to a concentration camp.

Eh. There are things worth dying for. I don't happen to agree with this particular statement, never mind think it's worth dying to state, but the worldview where this adds up even on a utilitarian level, never mind a deontological or virtue level, is not hard to construct.

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