site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2mo ago (text post)   29661 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 16, 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.

6
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Why? I've been confused by this. My neighborhoods have been plagued by an overpopulation of rabbits, deer and geese with at least the former two caused by what I presume is a complete absence of natural predators. I've often wished it were socially acceptable for me to trap and eat the rabbits that are wrecking my garden or the geese who poop all over my athletic fields and bike paths.

What is wrong with trapping rabbits? Just make sure you cook them with butter and have some vegetables to go with them- rabbit starvation is a real thing.

You're in rare form today hydro, no modern human needs to worry about 'rabbit starvation', plus you can just eat the brains, everyone knows. Mal de caribou... it isn't just rabbits, you need to eat some organs if you're not eating fruit and veg. Get with the times! the last person to die of rabbit starvation was probably born in 1800.

Well, apparently your neighbors will rat you out and presidential candidates will complain about immigrants like me savaging the pets and local wildlife of ($town). Especially if I'm Elmer Fudding around with a shotgun in my tiny suburban backyard, as fun as that might be.

Then there's the possibility of heavy metal contamination. I'm probably willing to risk it given that I don't like in some crazy repurposed industrial zone, but still.

Otherwise nothing wrong beyond being ostracized by my neighbors.

I mean, shooting rabbits is legitimately dangerous in populated areas for all the usual ‘don’t shoot your guns off like yosemite Sam’ reasons, but why can’t you just set out some traps?

They sound like (distant) screaming children, either when you're trying to move a live trap, or when any but the most humane kill trap goes off, which especially since they're most active at dawn and dusk can be an Interesting way to get a reputation. But they are prone enough to overpopulation that sometimes it's necessary.

I mean yeah, that’s true. But shouldn’t we have rules regarding how the animal control is done?

This kinda mirrors the immigration debate as a whole. Whatever you want the level of immigration to be, we should have a system. It shouldn’t just be a free for all like it has been under Biden.

But shouldn’t we have rules regarding how the animal control is done?

Why does castle doctrine only apply to people, when my property is invaded by rabbits on a daily basis?

More seriously, sure. At the risk of having been silent in the first round of discussions and popping up now to defend a second set of goalposts, I just don't see the outrage over people eating local rabbits/geese/deer. Obviously pets are a different story.

This kinda mirrors the immigration debate as a whole. Whatever you want the level of immigration to be, we should have a system. It shouldn’t just be a free for all like it has been under Biden.

Republicans seem to have won this debate, as they largely seem to have won the debate on China. One way or another, some kind of immigration bill is likely to pass after the election.

I just don't see the outrage over people eating local rabbits/geese/deer.

Many years ago the State (the Crown at the time I guess) decided that all non-privately owned animals are its exclusive property, and if the serfs citizens want to eat them they need to ask permission first. (which may be costly and/or not forthcoming)

The hunting community no longer quite thinks that hanging/transportation to Australia is the appropriate penalty for poaching, but it's not far off -- the modal law abiding hunter probably thinks something between 'I have to follow all the dumb rules or I go to jail, so should the Haitians' and 'they are literally stealing state/common property' on this.

Non-hunters probably don't care, but are probably even less keen on watching people kill geese in the park than they are on watching them smoke crack -- even legal hunting/trapping is perhaps best kept out of sight of the general public for this reason.

That's a good way to frame it, thank you.

(I still want to kill the rabbits on my property).

If there had been some day-one arguments about how the geese deserved it, I'd absolutely agree, perhaps with some quibbling about unequal treatment of the law given how obnoxious hunting (and nuisance) permits can be.

In practice, though, we had people here wanting to make bet money about a thing Not Happening.

Totally agree. We have so many annoying cats that, frankly, only a bigot would be against eating a few of them, dont you think?

What, do you live in Istanbul or something? Why does your neighborhood have so many feral cats?

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