site banner
PaperclipPerfector  10d ago (text post)   35660 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 20, 2025

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 don't think you can realistically compare the two countries in question because it doesn't take in consideration outside factors. There are two variables:

  1. How often are people getting arrested for something they say online.
  2. How often do people say something online that they can get arrested for.

My argument is that in Russia, due to the chilling effects of propaganda, astroturfing, arrests, assassinations, difference in treatment in prisons, general depoliticization of society, people in Russia are less likely to say something that attracts the attention of the government, especially using their real name. This isn't the free speech as you conceive of it in more liberal societies. This likely accounts for #2 being lower per capita in Russia than in UK in general - people know that you shouldn't speak out in a way that can attract unwanted attention.

Additionally, specifically due to section 127 including harassment, I'd argue that you'd need to go through each case to determine whether the government was punishing someone for exercising their right to free speech. This likely accounts for #1 being lower than reported in the original tweet for UK. I don't have modern data, I'd expect with the riots this would be higher than in 2017.

So do raw numbers really matter? My answer is: "No, they don't. The two cultures, social norms and political situations are fundamentally different".

Chilling effects apply in UK too, obviously. Major point of these laws is to get people to shut up.

The range of things that I can safely say online as a Brit is considerably wider than the range of things an American with a W-2 job can say if they want to keep it. (I acknowledge Trump may change this).

In Britain you can get fired AND get arrested/fined, in US only get fired (except in case of specific actionable threats).

In America you get fired the same day as soon as someone in comms wakes up someone in HR. In the UK you get put on administrative leave at full pay until a full work tribunal process is completed and/or you’re convicted which might be a year or two later and which involves the ability to mount an actual defense of some kind (and which defendants, in both cases, do sometimes win).

I don't think that's worth the possibility of going to prison though.

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