site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  2yr ago (text post)   28491 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 26, 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.

11
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

To summarize - you think Ukraine is a non playable character. No ability to create their own destiny.

In my opinion Ukraine is not a character. Proof of it is that the main leader of that 'nationalist' country is Jewish, thus not sharing the same ethnicity as most people in Ukraine and Russia (slavic), and was even sued a couple years ago for not using the official language (Ukrainian, a regional dialect of Russian that he learned as an adult) in official settings, Most people in that country speak Russian but the government has been playing a game of forcing Ukrainian as the official 'language', similarly to French in Quebec.

Aside from that, they cannot possibly win against Russia on their own, and they've been struggling with intelligence, spec ops and billions dollars in support from the richest country in the world.

Ukraine also had the ability to create their own destiny when they had pro-Russia leaders until that color revolution that brought in actors like Zelensky in charge.

I guess that was not the right type of democracy back then.

Poland cares about these borders. And a bunch of other smaller post Soviet countries in NATO all of which would have to decide on going to full hot war with Russia. Whether the US joins or not half of nato would likely end up in a hot war with Russia.

I don't think that's in question at this point.

One can also question why Poland would decide to strengthen ties to EU/NATO when they already put themselves on the bad side of the EU before for their treatment of LGBTQ+ minorities.

They may have ultimately more in common with the Russian block than the Western block, but that's up to them to figure out.

And Russia isn’t the ally I want against globohomo.

Which one is it then? Let's have globohomo fully destroy Western Europe because Russia bad?

Let's have globohomo fully destroy Western Europe because Russia bad?

Globohomo will sterilize itself into extinction in fairly short order, don't worry.

Globohomo might actually be demographically stable as long as it manages to recruit from outsider populations faster than it kills or sterilizes its members.

And demographically-stable outsider populations are developing immune responses rapidly.

Insofar as "globohomo" exists, surely Russians are as "globo" as the West, considering that they have no compunction about there being, generally, global organizations, global treaties, global frameworks etc. that nations are supposed to obey - they simply want the whole constellation and governance of the system to happen on a different basis than now (ie. one that would favor Russia more).

Thus, it all would boil down to "homo", which I'm choosing to interpret as meaning, obviously, homosexuality (I'm aware there's an explanation of the term where it means "global homogeneity" or whatever - this has always sounded, to me, as credible as "No, officer, don't ya know that ACAB means All Cats Are Beautiful?")m, and that would then boil down to it being OK for Russia to bomb Ukraine's infrastructure to smithereens, occupy vast stretches of land, kill untold numbers of Ukrainians etc... just to prevent there being a Pride parades in Donetsk and Sevastopol. Forgive me for not considering that enough of a reason for, well, anything resembling Russia's current actions, really.

We’ll disagree with most of that.

But no I don’t let globohomo win because Russia bad. I just don’t partner with Russia. I fight globohomo in other avenues (which does include allying with Ukraine after the war as a non globo homo country).

I speak truth to power against globohomo.

which does include allying with Ukraine after the war as a non globo homo country

Ukraine as a non globo homo country?

They’ve always been non globo homo.

You think the globo homo types would ever man trenches in 0 degree weather?

This the President

types would ever man trenches in 0 degree weather?

Them the ones getting eliminated by the President

Let's see what the 'New Ukrainians' look like once Zelensky is done with Ukraine.

Given Ukrainian demographic trends, social conservatism can be expected to be on an upswing.

He is a comedian so not sure what that is it. He should get rid of the gays. Last week I thought the issue was all the Ukranians were Nazis.

Zelensky does apparently fuck and has a wife and kids.

Poland is on pace to have higher per capita income than England.

But your opinion is quickly given - you don’t believe Ukranians exists. It’s like stepping on a cockroach.

This is horrible logic - “Ukraine had the chance to create their own identified when they had Russian leaders” - like wtf - that’s akin to Henry Ford saying you can buy a car any color you want as long as it’s black. You saying Ukraine could have any destiny they wanted as long as their a Russian colony.

Poland is on pace to have higher per capita income than England.

I wonder if this has to do with the quality of people that reside respectively in Poland and England.

I wonder if building stronger ties to NATO and EU is going to lead Poland toward increasing or decreasing the quality of the people that live there.

Let's not forget the assumption that higher per capita income should be used as an important metrics.

But your opinion is quickly given - you don’t believe Ukranians exists.

What do you care if Ukrainians exist? If the proportion of Ukrainian in Ukraine decreased by 10% but the per capita income increased by 10%, wouldn't that be positive for you?

This is horrible logic - “Ukraine had the chance to create their own identified when they had Russian leaders”

Ukraine had an identity for the hundreds of years that it was practically a part of Russia.

You do not seem to like that identity and you seem to believe that the 1991 to 2022 or 2014 to 2022 period is the 'real' Ukrainian identity. Arbitrary.

You saying Ukraine could have any destiny they wanted as long as their a Russian colony.

Oh now they are finally free from the Russian empire! They only have to come grovel to the American congress and take orders from American politicians. Surely this will improve their lot.

Proof of it is that the main leader of that 'nationalist' country is Jewish

Wild stuff.

No nation with a jewish president can be a sovereign country? Jewish people can't be nationalistic? This is "proof" that Ukraine is not sovereign, or has no agency in its own affairs?

Jewish nationalism is called zionism.

My evidence for Zelensky not being a Ukrainian nationalist is that :

-he is an actor. Not exactly where you expect to find nationalists, but it is a career where duplicity is an important skill

-he learned the Ukrainian dialect as an adult and was sued for not using it in official setting while it was a requirement of his job

It seems that Ukrainian nationalists are very concerned about usage of Ukrainian, why would an authentic nationalist not know that?

That's like being an American progressive who doesn't care to learn the pronouns.

Usually nationalists of a given country follow people that actually represent the majority of the nation.

For example American nationalists usually elect white people because that's who they think the nation should be represented by.

All I'm saying is that it's pretty odd for nationalists to elect a minority actor who does not even follow the basic codes (even law) of being an elected official for that country.

The fact that the guy immediately throws the country into a war that pretty much guarantees that Ukraine will not exist as a nation in any meaningful way in the future kind of support this further.

Sending all your womenfolk overseas for the next generation pretty much guarantees that you will not have fresh blood in the future, unless imported EU-style, but by my definition of nationalism, that is not really the same nation.

-he learned the Ukrainian dialect as an adult and was sued for not using it in official setting while it was a requirement of his job

If an IRA member grows ups using English and learns Gaelic only as an adult and cannot use it very well, does that ipso facto mean they're not an Irish nationalist?

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