site banner
PaperclipPerfector  25d ago (text post)   34282 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 28, 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.

Oooh, that’s smart. The evidence is literally destroyed, along with the ballots. Authorities would be able to switch to fire-resistant envelopes if this became a problem, but not until the next election cycle.

fire-resistant envelopes

My biggest complaint about The Batman other than it's absurd length.

Not the Riddler being 100% sane and rational until the director/writers realized he was too sympathetic and had him start indiscriminately target civilians with a flood?

Something like that. The film had a very lengthy narrative about Batman following the Riddler's string of murderers and clues. And also Selina's struggle against her father. Those story lines all wrapped up and the film was over. Wicked father dead, Riddler in jail. We're done.

And then they introduce the bomb truck/overly online white guy terrorists plot line and it goes on for another half hour or so. Pointlessly excessively long. And as you mention they threw away a better interpretation of the Riddler in which he murders corrupt politicians and mofiosos who wronged him and every other orphan in Gotham.

The evidence is literally destroyed, along with the ballots.

Do you think this was someone getting scared of the ballot stuffing they engaged in and torching the evidence, as opposed to someone trying to invalidate votes in a GOP advantage prectinct ?

Any such speculation is pointless unless and until we know who did this. It could be a GOP member worried about ballot stuffers. It could also be a democrat burning republicans ballots. It could be the government trying to cast doubts on a potential Trump win. It could be a teenager doing the equivalent of stuffing a firecracker in the mailbox because fire is cool. Trying to guess why it happened with no evidence of who did it is just going to end up with all sides accusing all others of trying to manipulate the outcome of the election. We have no idea.

Left off "homeless guy setting the fire because he wants to get arrested." e.g. https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/ballots-damaged-after-usps-mailbox-lit-fire-phoenix

But how likely are we to find out who did it? 50/50 seems high odds. Throwing a molotov into a mountain of paper isn't exactly something that is all that easy to sleuth out. Unless the offender drove up with a license plate visible to nearby cameras or stared into one their ID is going to be pretty hard.

No. I think if someone threw a match inside they would be able to catch him. My assumption is that this was some kind of delayed chemical reaction that was engineered to take place within one of the envelopes, the kind of thing that takes planning.

I think you have a massively optimistic idea of the competence of law enforcement.

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