site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   32517 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 7, 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.

What may raise eyebrows are some of the additions.

Wait, the War Department Department of Defense isn't usually considered a national security department? If that isn't, one wonders what is.

This isn't raising eyebrows to me because a lot of this stuff seems trivially correct.

  • Obviously, agencies with the power to ban all development of certain resources critical to national security qualify
  • Obviously, agencies that are in charge of keeping the electricity and natural gas working qualify
  • Obviously, agencies with the opportunity to destroy the economy over something stupid, like the uncommon cold, qualify
  • Obviously, agencies with the authority to arbitrarily declare food-producing practices as unsafe qualify

Stuff that has more gradual bad outcomes, like the Department of Education (not listed in this order), would be more of a stretch simply because their negligence degrades the country over long periods of time, not potentially overnight.

But I think this does add another bit of evidence that Trump's chaos has some deliberate intent that often gets lost in the media chaos that follows him.

The ultimate problem with Trump II is that he's a reformer in a country that has hit the Snooze button on reform since late 2001 for some or other distraction- blowing up 10-dollar camels with 2 million dollar missiles, causing 30% inflation because some people couldn't be bothered to wear masks, whatever the fuck Trump I was, and Yes We Can discover that black Presidents are just as useless as white Presidents.

I have to admit that I'm a little jealous, since European countries are actively cracking down on reform parties and jailing their members for something everyone does (they're far more progressive-traditionalist than the liberal Americans), the UK public actively prefers Two-Tier state policy, and the Canadians are too busy bitching about checks notes being offered a vote on policies that affect them to bother with reform (which would make it more likely they survive as a whole country).

he's a reformer

Really? Arguably one of the defining aspects of 'reform' in the traditional sense is it's opposition to special and entrenched interests, and a believe in a Chadwickian scientific governance. Free trade is in many ways the paradigmatic reform cause, as it stands against the special protection of a subset of society (manufacturers) in favour of the entire nation of consumers - most of the great reformers were free traders.

By contrast the whole ethic of Trump II seems to be that some of the nation deserves special status and protection (literally), and some of it (the public and service sectors) deserves punishment.

Really? Arguably one of the defining aspects of 'reform' in the traditional sense is it's opposition to special and entrenched interests...

Yes. Really.

Who are "the Swamp" if not "entrenched interests"? Much of complaints about Trump being erratic and not listening to the experts reads to me as "special and entrenched interests" frustrated by Trump's refusal to "stay bought".

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