site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4mo ago (text post)   32968 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 5, 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.

8
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You don't need her to take positions. Attack the Biden admin, force her to defend Biden, join in the attacks and split her party, or admit she has no power in the admin and her job is fake and gay.

She's vice president. She can't disavow the admin policies. Differences will be around the margins and mostly stylistic.

Not only do you not need her to take positions, there's a strong incentive for her to not take positions. Stand for nothing and people will fill in the gaps in their own mind. I bet if being a human being wasn't a requirement we would have a pet cat as a president.

Mayor Max likes this comment!

My favourite part of the linked page (my bolding):

Idyllwild is known for being one of the first places to elect a dog for mayor

There's a trend of this happening?

According to Business Insider, "9 dogs, 1 cat, and 3 goats" have been mayors of various towns in the US, though various towns including Idyllwild appear to have animal political dynasties going.

Apparently Max's page is peddling fake news, however. Wikipedia's "Non-Human Electoral Candidates" page has a large number of, uh, interesting winning candidates who predate Max's tenure.

Trump finally taught dems that the right way to campaign against him is with name calling and vibes so that’s what we’re going to get until he’s gone. It’s funny we only hear the right complaining about this once the weird couch fucker attacks from the left start landing.

  • -11

2012 Joe Biden said that Mitt Romney would put black people back in chains. Name-calling and lousy smears aren't a Trump invention.

It's pure shithousery, trying to play ugly and get a close draw or maybe sneak a win. Kamala is playing one news cycle at a time, tragically, and hoping to get a fast break late and win it.

I'm still negative on Kamala's chances, but I do think we're much more likely to see a Popular/Electoral split decision and a Democratic House than we were with Biden.

Name-calling and “vibes” were also the strategy in 2016. Racist/Sexist/Orange/Fascist have literally always been the plan of attack against Trump. I don’t see “weird” as changing that, it’s just an admission that their favorite cards have been overplayed

Name-calling and “vibes” were also the strategy in 2016. Racist/Sexist/Orange/Fascist have literally always been the plan of attack against Trump.

Trump is nothing new in substance, only in style. He's the ugly reflection of politics-as-usual who doesn't feign civility while throwing the same knives.

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