site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3d ago (text post)   20261 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 27, 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.

Homosexuals, immigrants, and disabled are very fond of straight white men and fiercely protect them when they're persecuted or murdered.

I dunno, I think my gay friends would stand up for me.

I suppose if you're so straight and white that you can't imagine ever being on the same side of history as homosexuals, immigrants and disabled, you have nothing to worry about and can continue to sneer at the lower castes. Although, as I suspect you know, there's always such a thing as not white enough.

Nothing in the linked article about not being white enough, only not being German / Aryan enough or being too Slavic.

What a bingo card answer. I'm saying that to expect them to "speak for me" is naive to the point of retardation, at best they will cheer when it's my turn, at worst they will be the ones who are coming for me.

Do you have no friends among "Them"? If you do, do you expect all of them to drop you at some point? If you don't, why would you expect anyone to speak for you any more than you speak for them?

No such friends; and I have no expectation of my enemies speaking for me, especially after their words and actions have demonstrated the reverse. It's the author of that shitty manipulative "poem" who says that we should have such an expectation for some reason.

You have no idea what it's been like for us the past 8 years, do you?

I have some. I've read themotte, as you can guess. The mindset of "what skin off the back of upstanding citizens is it to just let them die" does not become less alien to me. I don't like the jingoist boomers of my country either, but I hardly dream of rounding them up behind the shed or draining their towns of resources until they drink themselves to death.

There are two classes that I can imagine an average and sane citizen to overlook and mentally discount in this manner, which is the habitual violent criminals and those who are so dysfunctional that they barely intersect with regular society or economy (homeless, heavy drug users, mentally disabled). Not those who like it up the ass.

but I hardly dream of rounding them up behind the shed or draining their towns of resources until they drink themselves to death.

I have understood the sentence to be more akin to "cease supporting their self a destructive lifestyle".

Not those who like it up the ass.

Those who like it up the ass seem to have a rather entitled attitude regarding the provision of drugs for largely self-inflicted diseases. I understand how there's been a lot of propaganda about how society supposedly failed them by not providing them with a cure in the past, but I think discounting them is qualitatively the same as the case of addicts.

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