site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2d ago (text post)   10510 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 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.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Also, wow.

Is there any reasonable, by Western classical-liberalism standards, justification for this? Short of an external military crisis, it’s awfully hard for my American mind to think of a reason.

“I am declaring a state of emergency in order to protect the constitutional order based on freedom and eradicate shameful pro-North Korea anti-state groups, that are stealing freedom and happiness of our people,” Yoon said on the country’s YTN news channel. He added that this would protect the country “from the threats of North Korea’s communist forces.”

Yeah, it doesn’t sound like he bothered with an actual excuse. If there was some NK activity or scandal in recent months, it sure didn’t make American news.

More justifiable than Roosevelt's camps. In the past North Korea already managed to conquer all but a tiny sliver of South Korea and there is credible scenario where Seoul is reduced to rubble, with the repeat of the Pusan situation. When Roosevelt carted off every man, woman, and child of the wrong ethnicity into concentration camps, Japan hadn't yet managed to control all the continental US, sans Florida, and only those suffering from war hysteria thought demolition of DC by Japanese forces was within the realm of possibilities.

Yet despite Japan posing a much lesser threat to the US than North Korea does to the South one, enacting policies much more totalitarian than ones enacted by the current South Korean president wasn't enough to make US Americans consider FDR anything but a very examplar of a Western classical-liberal. This is shown by US American experts of US American history (1), holding him in very high regard. Thus not only is FDR loved by experts in the relevent field, he is also loved by the sufficently historically informed supporters of classical-liberalism.

(1) Given that the supporters of the US Democratic Party, the US party of classical-liberalism, are so greatly overrepresented, any ranking by US historians will, unless corrected for as in 1982 Murray–Blessing, inevitably be ranking by classical-liberals, with only token influence of believers in other political ideologies.

Uh…

How does a totalitarian act by an American justify an act by a Korean? They can both be unjustified.

I suppose I’d also expect suspending civilian government to lead to interment, etc., while the converse is less likely.

And “high regard” doesn’t make someone an “exemplar” of something. A lot of those classical liberals probably think Che was pretty cool, too.

Well remember, South Korea has only been a democracy for like 40 years, they had a military dictatorship until the early 1980s.

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