site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3mo ago (text post)   34142 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 29, 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.

Would you accept that argument for a school project that benefitted the IRGC or the PLA?

Israel is a U. S. ally; Iran and the Beijing claimant to China are, if not 'enemies' per se, at least hostile nations.

I think that might make a difference in many Unitedstatesians' assessment.

the Beijing claimant to China

If we're going with unorthodox phrasings, I personally prefer "West/Mainland Taiwan".

I don't see any reason to move on from "Red China". If they weren't Red, we could be friends.

I like to go with "Chinese Beijing".

I use "China" for the physical location and "PRC" for the government.

It can be important and relevant who the beneficiary is, but my main concern was being led to believe he served as enlisted or an officer in the IDF.

Depends if it was mandatory or not - a conscript's less culpable than a volunteer. Note that I'm not sure from the article whether Shapiro was a real volunteer or whether he was subject to mandatory unpaid child labour referred to as "volunteer" only because of the "unpaid" part. We usually don't blame the Jews in Auschwitz who worked the incinerators for doing so, as their only other choice was to be thrown in the incinerators themselves.

His current story is that his "volunteering" was for a required high school service project. I am sure that wasn't the only project available to fulfill the requirement, however.

From the Wikipedia article on Shapiro's private Jewish high school, it looks like doing a semester in Israel was optional, but I assume that once you made the decision to do that the "volunteering" was part of the deal. Whether the decision to do a semester in Israel was taken by Josh or his parents depends on family dynamics.

.... What are you talking about?

  1. People forced to do X are less culpable for the results of X than people who willingly chose to do X; the culpability lessens with increasing punishment for refusing.
  2. The most extreme example of this I can think of is the way Auschwitz worked; to cut costs, most of the labour to build and operate Auschwitz was performed by its Jewish inmates. Among other things, the ones loading all the Jew corpses into the incinerators were other Jews. However, we generally do not blame these Jews for helping to operate Auschwitz, as refusing to perform such work meant certain death.
  3. Some school activities that are called "volunteering" are not really voluntary; the word "volunteering" is used in reference to "volunteer work" i.e. the children are not paid for their labour, but if they do not do the work they are punished.
  4. I suspect that Josh Shapiro's "volunteer" work for the IDF may have been such a case of mandatory unpaid work.
  5. I strongly suspect that schools in China have such "volunteer" programs for the CPC and/or PLA; it's a classic tool of totalitarian systems (it literally shows up in Nineteen Eighty-Four) because it's free labour that also inculcates a sense of being part of the government system and acts as a crude loyalty screen.

Some school activities that are called "volunteering" are not really voluntary; the word "volunteering" is used in reference to "volunteer work" i.e. the children are not paid for their labour, but if they do not do the work they are punished.

I've heard this referred to as being 'voluntold'.

However, we generally do not blame these Jews for helping to operate Auschwitz, as refusing to perform such work meant certain death.

I would not say things are so clear-cut. Generally, helping running a death camp means being an accessory to murder -- former civilian clerks have been convicted in Germany for that in a few cases (Also, this commonly involves octogenarians in front of a youth criminal court.)

"I had to do it to save my own skin" (which is called duress in English law and entschuldigender Notstand in German law) is not a great excuse for serious crimes.

On the other hand, the culpability of Sonderkommando workers providing unskilled slave labor to the Nazi death machine is minimal, so I would call it excusable.

And then of course some members of the Sonderkommando fully redeemed themselves by blowing up a crematorium.

But Shapiro has previously claimed this as a thing he did and valued as an experience.

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