site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   38718 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 24, 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.

Just curious: why do you want to be in America instead of the UK? If I had no family or friends in America (maybe you do, I'm just assuming you don't), I think I'd be equally happy here or in the UK. I might even prefer to UK for some reasons.

The UK isn't a terrible place. It's about adequate, as a country where I could see myself residing and settling in, and it certainly beats India in most regards.

It's just that the US is better on almost all the metrics I personally care about:

  1. The pay is important to me. It's not my only concern, or I'd be considering places like the Middle East that lavish money on doctors with western training with more glee. US physician salaries can be double or triple that of British doctors.

  2. The UK is an authoritarian country, politely authoritarian in the quintessential British way , but authoritarian nonetheless. My freedom of speech is significantly curtailed. The US is the closest the planet truly has to a bastion of true free speech and freedom of association.

  3. The climate sucks. Scotland is lovely in the summer and early autumn, but I'd very much prefer sunnier climes, and even further down south in England isn't what I consider ideal.

  4. I identify with American political values and ideals far more than I do with British ones. Not in every case, but more often than not. I want to shoot full-auto AR-15s when I can dawg.

  5. I'm strongly concerned about technological unemployment, and the US is one of the countries that is most capable of weathering the storm without too much social disruption. This isn't something that can be taken for granted, but it has a much better manufacturing base than the UK does, and is far wealthier overall.

  6. I also think the States is far more vibrant and interesting, the UK is tiny, and Europe can be nice to visit, but I still prefer the States.

I would also do the same, and also add that the UK is a dying economy that doesn't produce great statesmen or have much in the way of political will.

British food does not deserve the reputation it gets, but it got that reputation on top of wartime rationing because British used to take a quiet pride in maintaining a stiff upper lip at things being shit and being grateful for what they're given. Then people figured out that this allowed them to get away with much worse because the poor fuckers were too polite to complain, and it was a sliding scale ever since. A Frenchman will complain if the wine pairing is wrong, an Italian will bitch that he can make the food better.

It took me a longer time to understand that this applies to British government as well. It's endemic in the EU, but much of the populace exists under a near perpetual state of learned helplessness, and if they act out, they know they are venting their frustration in a non-productive way. Americans are the opposite - many of them come across as naive and crazy to me, but they genuinely believe even destructive venting of their frustration has a positive effect. Storming the capitol on June 6 accomplished nothing and was never going to, but the irony of it all was that for a very brief moment, both the people storming the capitol and the people outraged that the capitol got stormed actually thought there was a chance it might. Similarly, BLM, #metoo, Occupy, etc.

Technological employment is shot in the entire EU and will never change. Their blind stabs at attempting to have a Silicon Valley for themselves will come to nothing; they pat themselves on the back over a few million dollars here and there in a technology fund when Meta misplaces that amount on whatever dumb initiative they're workshopping internally every Tuesday.

British food does not deserve the reputation it gets, but it got that reputation on top of wartime rationing because British used to take a quiet pride in maintaining a stiff upper lip at things being shit and being grateful for what they're given.

Also that Britain (alongside Belgium and the Netherlands, which do not exactly have a reputation for fine dining) industrialised and urbanised before refrigeration, which means that we went through a long period where most of the population did not have access to fresh food.

I identify with American political values and ideals far more than I do with British ones. Not in every case, but more often than not. I want to shoot full-auto AR-15s when I can dawg.

You should visit sometime and come hang out. We'll have some fun dawg.

My annual leave is mostly spent going back home to India for a few weeks, but I do plan to come to the States in the nearish future to attend a close friend's marriage. When I do, I'll be sure to hit you up!

aww yeee baby

For 1, I also want to ask what costs of living are like in each place, because that is as relevant as your salary. I feel like costs of living here are astronomical near cities, which is where most people want to live. But I don't know what it's like in the UK. I would have assumed that the socialized structure makes things cheaper to match the lower pay, so I'm curious to hear your take on it.

For 3, I think the climate sucks here too. But I've always lived in the northeast. Here the skies are gray 3/4 of the year.

6 is interesting. I feel the opposite, but maybe it's because I've lived here my whole life.

London is exorbitantly expensive. You have to either be very well off or very poor to live there without penny pinching, paradoxically. That's because the latter is often given free council housing in areas where free-market prices would be several thousands of pounds for a house in rent a month.

Most other cities are much better off in comparison, Edinburgh is expensive, but not the point it scares people away.

My main gripe is that I'm not being paid free-market wages. The NHS is a monopsony employer, and has a stranglehold on medical residencies and higher training. Doctors have faced sub-inflation pay raises for over a decade now, and even the meek and conflict-avoidant British doctors took to the streets in protest not that long ago. This lead to a recent pay uplift, but nowhere near enough to account for cumulative inflation. More or less every year, you face a gradual real-terms pay cut.

I am not strapped for cash, but only because I live well below my means and have no dependents. When I consider what I'd end up paying for things like childcare (I expect I'll marry another working professional, if not necessarily a doctor), it's rather eye watering. I don't think things like groceries or rents are significantly lower than the States, and housing prices have to account for the fact that UK housing is tiny compared to the former.

And regardless of the precise COL, which can vary substantially like you think, there's no way that the double or triple pay raise the US represents is beaten by it. Proportionally, I'd pay much less for private insurance than I would for the NHS, through taxes.

For 3, I think the climate sucks here too. But I've always lived in the northeast. Here the skies are gray 3/4 of the year.

That's the beauty of the States, you can choose to live anywhere from subtropical marshland to arctic conditions or a baking desert. I'd head to somewhere where the winters didn't last over 4 months.

6 is interesting. I feel the opposite, but maybe it's because I've lived here my whole life.

It's by far the most subjective claim I make. Some people, like @2rafa would claim that London is unmatched for its vibes and culture. I wasn't particularly impressed myself. I would absolutely take the Bay Area every time over anything that the UK offers, but others have different preferences.

For 1, I also want to ask what costs of living are like in each place, because that is as relevant as your salary.

The difference in material standards of living between the UK and the USA is real, and large, particularly for the upper-middle class, and within the upper-middle class particularly for doctors and programmers. But this is obfuscated by the fact that the consumption bundle of an upper-middle-class suburban Londoner (which includes low-crime, low-filth walkable urbanism) is close to unavailable at any price in the US and the consumption bundle of an upper-middle-class suburban American (which includes one light-duty commercial vehicle per adult used as personal transport) is taxed into oblivion in the UK.

I'm strongly concerned about technological unemployment, and the US is one of the countries that is most capable of weathering the storm without too much social disruption. This isn't something that can be taken for granted, but it has a much better manufacturing base than the UK does, and is far wealthier overall.

I find this surprising. The US seems to me to be in an unusually weak position to handle technological unemployment in that:

  • One side of the political fence is opposed to a redistributive welfare state in principle, and has a particular hate-on for unemployed working-age adults. The best the GOP is likely to offer the technologically unemployed is deliberately unpleasant make-work jobs.
  • The US has a worse-than-average fiscal position compared to other rich countries, and a political system (Presidential democracy with separation of powers) which obfuscates responsibility for fixing it.

I find this surprising. The US seems to me to be in an unusually weak position to handle technological unemployment

We're approaching a world where Humans Need Not Apply. When that happens, the quality of human capital becomes mostly irrelevant, and things like raw resources, an existing manufacturing base that can be rapidly automated, and a smaller population that needs to subsist off UBI becomes the only real differentiating factors between nations. This is, of course, simplification, AI can take many trajectories, but as of early 2025, we're seeing near parity between the US and China, the latter is only 6 months behind, though it might fall further if chip shortages become the limiting factor.

Surprisingly, by virtue of the world's largest manufacturing base, China is surprisingly well positioned to make the most of automation. A lot of the factories are robotic, and eventually all of them will be.

On the other hand, the US has a decent manufacturing base, albeit one that has seen relative and absolute decline. It is, however, much richer in terms of initial capital, which is what allows rapid scaling once humans are no longer the bottleneck.

Even if the Republicans are against welfare (and my impression is that they're loathe to cut back things that a large portion of what their underemployed and disenfranchised voters require to survive), once we're seeing double digit unemployment, they're going to either be forced to accept UBI, or watch as the majority of the population starves. The latter isn't something I can say won't happen, but the US is large, rich, relatively underpopulated, and has welfare systems that could expand to cover nearly the entire population. I would strongly expect that in the initial turmoil, citizens would be prioritized over all others.

Other countries might be rich. They lack the industry or the raw resources to keep up. What will Singapore be forced to do when most of its services and the highly skilled and educated workforce becomes redundant?

once we're seeing double digit unemployment, they're going to either be forced to accept UBI, or watch as the majority of the population starves.

What on earth makes you think these are the only options?

There’s going to be great variety on the make-work-to-UBI scale. I can see the Nordics embracing UBI, but the Americans? They will have you (or us) dig ditches and fill them in before they hand everyone no strings attached spending power, I’d bet on it. Your knowledge of American culture and values is still less than fully developed.

I have discussed a whole range of options in the past, including make-work. Even that is a form of UBI, just a rather shitty one, and once again, the US would be in a better position to make it work.

So are current make work jobs like hospital administrators or financial regulators UBI then? Seems like a wide definition.

Opinions differ strongly on how much of that is is "make work". From the perspective of a hospital, the administrators provide some value, even if it's due to a need to engage with a labrynthine bureaucracy and governmentally imposed regulation. Someone being paid to fill up a hole that someone else is paid to dig, is at the least, filling up a hole that might trip up passersby.

It's like saying the military is make-work, because the main reason each nation needs one is because other nations have their own.

If there's a point where humans are not employable in a free market, but rely entirely on government work or government mandated work that requires a human in the loop, it is a shitty form of UBI.

There are a lot of cultural reasons to prefer the US to the UK

  • The UK is much more aristocratic and hereditarian---there's a royal family, a House of Lords, everyone is judged by the accent they developed while growing up, most politicians didn't just go to the same few universities, but literally the exact same high school, etc.
  • Social conversation in the UK sometimes feels like its 50% a competition about how cleverly you can insult the other person. This is really distracting if you ever want to talk about something substantive. Despite it being mostly in good humor, the constant negativity is really draining.
  • The above two points also enforce quite a bit of social conformism. Having unusual hobbies or interests for your social class is much harder than in the US.
  • Ambition and particularly hard work are looked upon much more favorably in the US.

Social conversation in the UK sometimes feels like its 50% a competition about how cleverly you can insult the other person. This is really distracting if you ever want to talk about something substantive. Despite it being mostly in good humor, the constant negativity is really draining.

Hah, this is interesting. I've felt drained recently because specifically where I live, social conversation is about how little you give a fuck about anything, and how blatantly and non-cleverly you can be about insulting the other person, but still have them take it. And I remember in high school that to have any interests at all made you a loser. All of life is about seeming like you don't give a fuck, here. But this is very specific to my region.

Isn't that all of Western culture, to some extent? There's a reason why "cool" (as in cold, disinterested) was the ideal that everyone strived towards for decades, and has basically become our generic casual word for "good". I'm just glad that this ideal seems to finally have gone on the retreat since about 2010 or so (but then all of the political heating was probably part of the monkey's-paw price for that).

Eh, I think irony and detachment was the thing that took over around 2010, though that too may be passing.

That might be the case. That'd make me happy if my kids grew up in a high school where they didn't have to act like they don't care about anything.

But also, having lived in several different areas, even recently, I think the people in my particular area are more rude than in other places.

If so, then I think we should tread with some care. Stoicism is a worthwhile ability to keep around; I thoroughly despise the drama queens who will turn everything into an outburst worthy of being put on social media.

Obviously there are harmful extremes in both directions. But the happy medium is, IMO, a little towards the cool side. But of course I would say that.

The UK is much poorer than the US, and in particular doctor salaries are oddly low there.

Oh, I guess that makes sense. Do doctors work their asses off in the UK like they do in the US? Whenever I talk to my doctor friends, their lives sound miserable, almost like they're being hazed by a fraternity for years on end. I don't personally know anyone who became a doctor who wasn't pushed into it by strong family expectations.

The answer is: It depends.

What kind of doctor? As a psychiatrist, I don't think my work would look very different in either country, but I know which one would pay me double or triple. At the very least, American doctors have the option of cutting back their hours while still making more than we do.

I think in most other specialities, doctors are just about as harried and overworked, but it's hard to say for sure.

The UK medical system has a lot of weird quirks designed to make sure doctors stay there and stay cheap. It's a natural consequence of the NHS's fully nationalized setup.

They purposely don't enter into some certification equivalence treaties so British doctors don't get the qualifications to go abroad easily for instance.

And Europe in general has low salaries compared to similarly developed countries because taxes make supergross salaries quite expensive.

If you're a successful upper middle class professional, Europe (bar few exceptions) offers a shit deal versus any other developed country. You are essentially paying for everything and getting subpart services in return. Hence the massive brain drain.

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