site banner
PaperclipPerfector  12d ago (text post)   33245 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 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.

4
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Anglos aren't ready for ethnic cleansing. They are convenient allies but the strings attached to their aid are a nuisance.

A Jewish hegemony would put their vassals only in the position of following and giving tribute, not complaining.

So the best way to do this is by making the UK look dumb and kneecapping American power in the Pacific so that the United States is more likely to lose a war with China, making it more likely to pull back its Middle Eastern commitments, including the missile shield that's been protecting Israel from Iranian ballistic missiles and the foreign aid they've been receiving ever year?

I don't think that this conspiracy is likely or that anything is so rationally planned, but Israel might prefer a more multipolar world. China doesn't care which tribe occupies a particular piece of land or how it governs it, so long as it's pliant to China's national interests. A realignment with China would mean much less finger wagging, no threats of boycotts, no constraints around solving security issues. It's not altogether clear that access to weaponry would even suffer too much, especially a decade from now (and if Israel's primary problem is controlling an insubordinate population, China already has the US beat there in technology). And, if nothing else, Israel could play the US and China against each other, hoping to get the best deal from both. The only big question is whether Israel can offer more to China than China's Middle Eastern allies can (which seems unlikely, but maybe China could find a way to thread the needle and work with both).

Uh, Israel has strong interest in a world police existing, and china’s local Allies are firmly anti-Israel.

China is relatively pro-Palestinian and long had been. Not to the extent of actually becoming involved in the conflict or ending diplomatic ties with Israel (at least since they were established in 92), but it was part of the general anti Israel shift observed in the communist world from the 1970s onward. In addition, the useful Chinese diasporas in Malaysia and Indonesia, which China has worked hard to build ties with and be seen as defenders of, are dependent to some extent upon Islamic tolerance.

Which nations are ready? If Jewish interests are in line with Israeli interests, then seems like they should push the West towards more revanchist focus, assertive actions, and more power. Then these nations have fewer reasons to denounce actions of Israel abroad. If Israel does want to commit an ethnic cleansing. If Jewish interests are separate from Israeli interests it would make sense that Israeli policy would be a focus rather than irrelevant Britain.

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