site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5d ago (text post)   22069 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 23, 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.

This article annoyed me, because Freddie has had two non-fiction books published by major American publishers, routinely flexes about how many prestige publications he's been published in, and has mentioned on several occasions that his combined annual Substack and freelancing revenue is in the $250k range - and then he has the nerve to turn around and say that he's "never been in the position" to say that he's successful and he knows it?

This is not being humble or modest - this is literally word for word the exact behaviour he wrote an entire article decrying. I would have called him out on it but the comments are only open to paid subscribers.

This article annoyed me, because Freddie has had two non-fiction books published by major American publishers, routinely flexes about how many prestige publications he's been published in, and has mentioned on several occasions that his combined annual Substack and freelancing revenue is in the $250k range - and then he has the nerve to turn around and say that he's "never been in the position" to say that he's successful and he knows it?

The difference between him and someone he considers "successful" is that he can't stop. Elon Musk, Carlos Tavares, or even Taylor Swift can wake up tomorrow and say to their reflection in the mirror, "you know what, fuck that, I want to switch to goose farming" and do just that. Their families will not be harmed by this choice, but de Boer must constantly tread water to earn his $250k. He might decide he doesn't want to work that hard and scale down his earnings to just $125k, but he can't just stop writing, he's not a capitalist.

But I presume that's also true of the two people he was motivated to write the article about. I don't think he was writing about billionaires.

It's hard to say, but the article seems to be about other PMC professionals he went to high school with in Connecticut, not robber barons. Depending on lifestyle, a nutmegger lawyer or consultant can't stop and grow beets in upstate NY any more than Freddie can.

The eternal struggle of the rich Marxist...

I dunno, this one is just one more on the list of "times FdB almost got it, but stopped just short of the obvious conclusion." The people being criticized here are, to a statistically significant degree, all rich, urban leftists. Freddy is also a rich, urban leftist who writes exellent articles taking 95% of the piss out of a group he knows very well, but that last 5% will not happen until he realizes the system he supports is the same one he criticizes.

I see a similar tone, though not so close to almost getting it, in many of Scotts SSC and ACT writings. I predict the "are we the baddies" meme has a bright future.

I see a similar tone, though not so close to almost getting it, in many of Scotts SSC and ACT writings.

Any particular ones you have in mind?

I actually just caught him being excerpted approvingly in the "Notable and Quotable" section of the Wall Street Journal. Now that's being close to money.

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