site banner
PaperclipPerfector  6d ago (text post)   31150 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 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.

6
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Canada didn't take a stance of "attacking China is racist" over the past few years when the past few administrations have increasingly become China hawks and drawn Canada into things like the Huawei fight.

Trump on the other hand has shown himself to have a disdainful attitude towards the very countries he'd presumably be creating a unified bloc with for ?? reasons that no one can agree with.

All anyone wants is greater integration with America. If anything, part of Canada's weakness here is from becoming too complacent and relying on that. It was already going to happen if the US was bringing back manufacturing. The only impediment to more of that is Trump.

the past few administrations have increasingly become China hawks

LOL

https://www.nsicop-cpsnr.ca/reports/rp-2024-06-03/special-report-foreign-interference.pdf

For the benefit of people who don't feel like reading a 90-page document in order to continue the conversation, relevant portions (that aren't censored):

  • the CPC ran an online campaign trying to get Canadians to not vote for the Conservative Party
  • the CPC tried to "make an example" of a Chinese-Canadian Conservative MP in an unspecified fashion
  • the CPC took extreme steps to get Han Dong elected, including bussing in ineligible Chinese students to vote for him in (Liberal Party) preselection on threat of their visas being cancelled
  • the CPC interfered in leadership selection of the Conservative Party
  • the Conservative Party complained that the team trying to protect the election from interference wasn't taking their concerns seriously
  • the intelligence services wanted to brief all MPs regarding foreign interference but the Trudeau government ignored them
  • the report accuses the Trudeau government of requesting that intelligence reports be withdrawn due to being too politically sensitive
  • foreign interference doesn't appear to have affected the overall outcome of the 2021 election but does seem to have had some more local impact

NB: I am strongly of the opinion that @jkf should have provided such a digest himself.

Lol and a pdf? Come on son!

It's more effort than he deserves -- "LPC is hawkish on China" isn't even low effort, it's just agitprop.

That's not my point. I said the LPC hasn't been banging the racist drum even though it's clear that basically every US administration has been getting more and more hawkish on China. Even when it demands actions that create problems for Canada.

Y'know, as we discussed all of a day ago.

it's just agitprop.

As opposed to blaming a lack of further integration on Canadian wokeness when Trump is the one taking a cleaver to his own trade deal because ?? tariffs.

Please

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