site banner
PaperclipPerfector  24d ago (text post)   32063 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 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.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I think a common sense approach is best here. Rubio , while less then the others , is indeed showing signs of 'brainrot'. https://x.com/marcorubio/status/1898755922492588082 , this is not a serious answer to another politician who is correcting musk's nonsense, this would be considered a bad answer here on the motte , so you can't tell me it's an appropriate response for this level of communication. The US goverment is clearly confused, fanatic and out of control and the evidence is right there , no reason to trip over ourselves with analysis. There are literally hundreds of examples of this. I literally just yesterday saw a goverment official say something like ' trump is the only person in the universe that can solve the ukraine war' , yes he did say ' in the universe' , what the hell is going on? I am not even going to talk about Homan and his insane antics.

The whole thing is more performative then substantial, seems like everyone is trying to show off , with some of them being legitimately insane/incapable.

yes he did say ' in the universe' , what the hell is going on?

Unless he's claiming there are aliens, "in the universe" is the same as "in the world". It's just a rhetorical flourish, it doesn't actually mean anything different.

I am aware , that doesn't make it any better though .It is a cartoonishly ridiculous level of ass-licking. I could barely believe what I was hearing , rhetoric like that obviously has no place in a serious discussion. Children speak like that.

Take to task the Polish asshole who turned something clearly not a threat into a threat.

Musk's constant antagonizing of europeans is not in question. So it's not that one tweet that's problematic , but his whole stance getting involved in shit he knows nothing about and shouldnt be involved in. The only asshole is Musk , in fact I personally believe most people are way too lenient on him. I like the way the french politician put it ,' the ketamine addicted buffoon' i believe he said.

EDIT: Also did you read the tweet , musk says verbatim ' Their entire front line would collapse if it turned off' . Very well could be a threat. And considering how much of a demented asshole elon musk has been that's certainly how I would take it too.

Context. Musk was saying “I’m not a Putin stooge—I challenged Putin to single combat and I’m basically the person most responsible for keeping the Ukraine army in the fight so don’t call me a Putin stooge.”

It was only a threat if someone doesn’t understand context

Context ' I said some nonsensical idiotic things 3 years ago , so you should take these more seriously then the idiotic things I said yesterday which were highly critical of you and positive of Putin' . Seriously? This is your argument? Elon isn't the 'person most responsible for keeping the ukraine army in the fight' that is a ridiculous statement. Are we saying whatever at this point without any interest to the truth? Seems like you don't actually understand context.

Truth?

Let’s recap slowly for you since you seem to be having trouble understanding.

  1. The claim was the Polish FM was an asshole for trying to conjure up a threat.

  2. You claimed it was a threat.

  3. I said “look at the context — Musk was making a claim to prove he wasn’t a Putin lackey and therefore his statement that Ukraine would fall absent his Starlink was not a threat but a premise in his argument.”

  4. You respond that Musk is closer to a puppet of Putin. That is of course orthogonal to whether in Musk’s post on X he was making a threat where of course he wasn’t. Yet you continue to get high on your horse calling me uninterested in truth?

  5. Finally the ability to actually communicate amongst your frontlines is crucially important. Elon might play a small part overall but that doesn’t mean there is another person more responsible for saving Ukraine than Elon. I know that hurts to hear because you are balls deep in your hatred of Trump and Elon but the truth can hurt.

Of course it’s not a serious answer. Social media has near-zero incentive for serious answers. Televised Congressional hearings were bad enough when it came to grandstanding; why’d we have to make the feedback instant?

Twitter delenda est.

I know that’s not actually a practical option. I would like some way to convince the public that it’s not actually important, though.

I know that’s not actually a practical option. I would like some way to convince the public that it’s not actually important, though.

Power Importance resides where men believe it resides

You know, I don’t actually own a crossbow yet.

I thought all mods got one?

Nah, they only issue us Lugers.

What are you referring to when you say ' it's not actually important ' ?

Twitter. X? The broader category of short-form social media, really.

Imagine if most government broadcasts came through TikTok. Every day a bureaucrat would smile for the camera and tell you how great the economic forecast looks for today, or that we’ve always been at war with Eastasia. Then she’d floss or whatever it is the youth are doing. Fifteen seconds total.

It’s fundamentally silly. Unserious. Recognizably low ratio of signal to noise. You could swap out the message and 90% of the video wouldn’t change, because it’s almost entirely style over substance.

That’s X. The actual content of a tweet is of secondary importance. What matters is the style—the snappy phrasing, the correct applause lights. What matters is connecting those things to the right people. Deliver unto your bubble what they were already thinking, and the algorithm shall reward you.

Elon Musk can quote whatever the fuck he wants and people who like his style will gather, insisting he’s “directionally correct.” Then his network gives him all the positive feedback he apparently craves. The amplifier is in saturation. There is next to no signal.

I would like the general public to feel the same way about tweets as they do about TikToks. They are entertainment. Leave the information transfer to a more serious medium.

Oh of course. I agree. In fact I would be even more pessimistic in my position and would say that you underestimate how much the younger generation ( 26 and under ) believes what they see on tiktok. I am 26 and see it relatively often in some of my peers , thankfully not many , yet the younger you go the more the percentage increases. Pretty depressing honestly. I personally believe at this point that X , tiktok and instagram are some of the worst things that have happened to humanity.

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