site banner
PaperclipPerfector  19d ago (text post)   35139 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 3, 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.

Source on any of this? Saying the CIA is funding ISIS to sabotage America in the name of decolonization, done through USAID and migrant caravans for the nefarious goal of the subversion of MAGA sounds like a QAnon schizopost that got put through a blender one too many times.

Edit: As always, Hanania says it better than I could.

Erm, I am missing something or the point here being "maybe it's true we're being robbed to the tune of trillions of dollars but I am not willing to discuss this until people that claim that present the evidence in a form that is most fitting to my biases"? If so, this sounds extremely childish and unserious approach.

There's also several issues here, which are related but not the same: 1. Is USAID a CIA-directed (or -influenced) front which is being misrepresented to the public as something it isn't? 2. Is USAID directing aid to causes that the American public would prefer not to finance if it knew? 3. Are those causes and recipients mostly leftist partisan organizations and benefit partisan leftist goals? 4. Are those organizations endorsing the ideology that sees US as evil and helps causes that hurt the US public? 5. Is the CIA selecting such organizations with explicit intent of hurting the US, or just tolerating them for other reasons or maybe thinking they gain "soft power" this way or some other reason?

I would be very surprised if there was a middle eastern armed group notable enough to get an English name which didn’t receive funding from the US government somehow. ‘CIA money flowed to IS’ is a page five story. Funding armed nuts that turn out not to be our friends is the sort of thing they do all the time.

I would be very surprised

People have priors, we get. Flat Earth Society people would also claim, that they'd be surprised to discover that Antarctica is not a CIA cover for something nefarious. Still, would be nice to have something solid, you know.

CIA money flowed to IS

Sure I can believe this one link in the chain well enough, it's all the other links surrounding it that make it sound like a conspiratorial word-salad. CIA money made it to ISIS... but for "decolonization"? And this is linked to migrant caravans?

Also the claim of "actively working against American interests". Like, yes, obviously the CIA funds all sorts of bad people (e.g. bin Laden) if it thinks that this will serve American goals (e.g. hurting the Soviet Union), and sometimes this blows up in its face (e.g. the World Trade Center), but that's not the same thing as deliberately working against the USA.

I think the CIa serves the CIA’s interest which generally but not always aligns with the US’ interests.

I beg your pardon, this is not a QAnon "hollywood is harvesting adrenochrome from kids at Jonas Brother's concerts" level of schitzo-posting, this is a reasonably normie-pilled "Epstien didn't kill himself", "covid was developed in a Chinese lab" and "the Biden administration built a peir in Gaza because they didn't want the Isrealis or the Egyptians inspecting the crates" level of schitzo-posting.

You can add here "Moon Landing was a hoax" or "9/11 is an inside job". It's also "normie-pilled", and there is some probability that it is true. Still, the level of discourse around it here is exactly that — "normie". "Midwit". 105 IQ. I would expect better from the public on this forum.

Biden administration built a [pier] in Gaza because they didn't want the [Israelis] or the Egyptians inspecting the crates

I'd assumed it was that they were under a lot of pier pressure.

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