site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   16085 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 19, 2022

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.

16
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I realize brits love their royal family

I always find this itself pretty strange. American's can hardly even keep a culture of respect for their founding fathers who at least have the mysticism of time to lighten their dark marks but the brits are able to be unendingly in favor of a hereditary elite constantly involved in scandals. My most downvoted post on this site was comparing them to the Kardashians but I stand by it. If the Royal family was based in America it would be a very hated institution, we even hate the people who earned their billions here.

In the words of Arthur Fleck: "You wouldn't get it."

Royals are a connection to a deep tradition of organic government that has lasted for more than a thousand years. Elisabeth was with the Brits for most of their life, an anchor of stability and continuity in a chaotic world that connected centuries through unbroken tradition.

Americans being such a young and exuberant nation do not really have the ability to appreciate the value of this. The king is not a founding father, it goes much deeper than that.

The loss of such things can deeply scar a people. Take it from the guys who killed their King two centuries ago and still aren't really over it.

Peterson of all people said it very well. There are actually four heads of government power: Judicial, Legislative, Executive, and Symbolic. In America, the last two are assigned to the POTUS, which causes a bunch of problems, but in England it keeps celebrity nonsense stuff safely contained and away from the formal power (and causes a different set of problems instead).

And progressive Texans love their lone star culture markers even if they would be considered red tribe elsewhere in the country. Why? Because loving football, cowboy boots, pickup trucks, and the oil industry is a unifying cultural institution. Just because the USA doesn’t have unifying institutions, doesn’t mean they can’t exist somewhere- the monarchy is for Britain what soccer is for Argentina.

I was trying to explain this on reddit last week. Texas has state patriotism like no one else. Regardless of my opinions on the local government, I love being part of the state’s culture. That was not the case back when I lived in South Carolina.

You’ll see it to a lesser extent in Oklahoma and parts of Louisiana(particularly Cajuns- and the 10 or so white creoles who haven’t been folded into Cajun identity by now- are likely to identify with Louisiana or Cajun identity over a national or local identity). I do agree that other southern states don’t have the same level of state patriotism, much less northern or western states. And in any case both Oklahoma and southern Louisiana have absolutely enormous amounts of Texas influence, culturally speaking.

There's a fair amount of state patriotism in Wisconsin, in my experience. We love being macho about the cold, the Packers, wearing cheeseheads, how much we can drink compared to other states, etc. I left because in all honesty fuck the weather... but I do miss my home state and love it dearly. And my experience with other people from Wisconsin is that they are generally the same way.

I wouldn't say we're on the level of Texas, because who is really? But it's still significant.

It's part of the ontology of what makes you British, like fish and chips or poor dental health. Rejecting monarchism causes an existential crisis in the British psyche - which would be bad enough on its own, but when one starts to think "OK, I'm No True Scotsman because I don't like the monarchy" then as a Western European this puts you dangerously close to being French, which the British (or post-British) psyche also recoils from.

If you don't yell God Save The King, are you really British? Or are you just some guy with a lame piece of paper signed by (chortle) Rishi Sunak that confers upon you legal citizenship on a rainy island?

But surely there is some giant set of seething academics who hate that their society idolizes literal colonizers? Or to look at it from the other way, where did all the people who transparently hate America and everything it stands for come from in the States and why doesn't this same process happen elsewhere? Where is the equivalent of the person who every thanks giving delights in shitting on the settlers? Isn't the UK one of the countries that sneers at the US for being backwards and unenlightened?

Sure. There has long been a minority of republicans in the UK. The problem is that they mostly come off as seething radicals, and though there are a good number of republican politicians, they mostly choose to downplay it or hide it, because they know how poorly it goes down with voters. And of course there are plenty of radicals on the left in papers like the Guardian who don't hide their contempt for the Royal Family (or for anything they judge as too white and too old).

This is good background but doesn't answer my question of why the 'republicans' of the UK as dismissed but the 'America is an irredeemable country' people in the states are not.

Aren't they dismissed in the US? Yeah there are people in academia or what have you that openly hate the country. But by and large, politicians (even Democrats) have to act patriotic if they want to have political success. That seems rather analogous to what @Mewis was saying about the UK.

The USA doesn’t stand for anything. Certainly parts of the USA have unifying myths or culture based nationalism(and politicians in these places are quick to praise those myths or nationalism even when it’s aligning with the other team nationally), but a New Yorker, a Californian, a Texan, and a Floridian probably will not be able to agree amongst themselves which of them apply to the whole country.

What does the UK stand for then? They're certainly not without their regional troubles.

The monarchy. It’s in the name. The most politically successful secession movement(Northern Ireland) is explicitly Republican.

deleted

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