site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   28060 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.

The alternative to expensive heating is maintaining a substantial military that occasionally kills an appreciable portion of your workforce. Europeans of the future will count this as an unmitigated win.

Expensive heating and expensive power. The kind of stuff you need to run factories that would help you equip an army when you inevitably come to need one.

In what universe does successfully defeating your rivals and preserving the sovereignty of not even allies harm one's credibility?

Successfully defeating your rivals? First they could start by successfully defeating the Taliban.

Guess what, they celebrate the coincidence of getting out of Afghanistan in time to have the resources to tackle Ukraine.

Are you actually able to look at the Russia Ukraine conflict and conclude that nations should strive to be on the Russian side of the equation?

At least the Russians have the balls to resist American commands. I imagine a number of Eastern-Europeans would understand that.

If you're an Eastern European country watching this go down you'd trade just about anything to be in the good graces of uncle Sam.

Yes just like the Poles strove to be on the good side of Britain and France, how'd that work out for them at the time?

Maybe they should remember that the Soviet conquest of Poland was possible thanks to the American lend-lease?

I bet you can find that "America, world police" song on juke boxes in Poland.

Yep and that should be incredibly shameful.

Here's Germany 40 years under America vs 40 years under Soviet Union.

Here's Germany 40 years under America vs 40 years under Soviet Union.

Great job, russia! Fucked up East Germany so badly that not even muslim immigrants want to live there.

How many muslims live in Russia, again?

Plenty of muslims living in Russians but they are not purposefully importing them afaik.

Russia is arguably better at managing multiculturalism than NATO.

Fucked up East Germany so badly that not even muslim immigrants want to live there.

That's one way of looking at it. Another way to look at it is that an atheistic or muslim Germany would not be very much German at all.

Fair points, but still not a sales pitch. East Germany is economically so rundown that young Germans still flee it 30 years after unification. Economic ruin is not a superior alternative to cultural ruin, and exchanging one for the other is not worth letting Russia have its way.

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