site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2mo ago (text post)   28486 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 2, 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.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

(I'm responding in general to this whole subthread.)

Right wing X.com, where I personally think all of the action is in this arena, isn't really a huge fan of MartyrMade, and him being featured on Tucker's show post-FOX isn't really surprising considering the guests he's had on in the past. A while ago there was a dust-up between MartyrMade and influential anons over the issue of immigration. IIRC, MM is against the pursuit of mass deportation because it's unlikely to work or, reading between the lines, because he doesn't want it to happen, or is morally opposed to it. This didn't go over well at all and no one really talks about him in a good way, but not many people talk about him at all. I don't think his podcast has a lot of purchase in the sphere, and his buddy Jocko "GOOD" Willink is a meme in himself too. All this to say: I don't think anyone with any real influence in the dissident sphere is friends with or even appreciates this guy in any way.

I mention Tucker being post-FOX because, for a while, Tucker was viewed with some respect in the dissident sphere. He was seen as "one of us." Since his departure it's become clear that he is mostly just a talking head, and it was more likely one or more of his producers were closely monitoring dissident Twitter and echoing their themes on the show. So, this is to say: MM's appearance on Tucker at this point in his career isn't indicative of some sort of acceptance of MM by RW dissidents, and it wouldn't have happened on FOX.

“Influential anons.”

How does that work?

Speaking of mainstream right producers/writers having their ear to the disident right online, I have to admit the absolute Zenith of keks for me was when Trump gave the Inauguration speech with the Bane posting right in there.

I don't think people are commenting on mainstream media's acceptance of heterodox history so much as what topics it is materially possible to discuss on the public square and expose the public to.

It wouldn't have happened on Fox, but that's not where the gravity center of American right wing discourse is anymore.

Or at least it doesn't seem to be. I'd like a second opinion on that. My impression is that Tucker is still very popular among right wing normies and who he talks to is notable. But I may be wrong.

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