site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  2yr ago (text post)   32470 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 2, 2023

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.

10
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What do you know of "resistance"? What makes you think mine is "milquetoast"?

I'm not the one here who's ensconced themselves in a progressive bubble only to go anonymously bitch about it on the internet while still parroting their leftist sociology professor's talking points. Nor am I the one trying to delude themselves into thinking that Kolmogorov Complicity is somehow not complicity.

I know what I am and where I stand, and that is in defense of the old ways against the nihilistic post-modernism that seems to have eaten academia and much of the mainstream media from within.

You really think "Democrats are the real racists" is you standing against fearful odds

No, I think it is a statement of a simple historical fact. But we are also at a point where statements of historical fact can be a form of resistance. The opening to the US Declaration of Independance does not read "after careful examination of the available sociological data and best academic arguments we have concluded..." it reads "We hold these truths to be self-evident..." what you've never seemed to grasp throughout our interactions is that I don't just reject the woke democratic narrative, I reject the whole psuedo-Marxist framework upon which it is built. That is why I hold both the woke left and the alt right in contempt and why my first impulse in any conflict between the two is to root for casualties. Identity Politics Delenda Est.

As for Brave Horatius, I think that he and Franz Jagerstatter would find common ground in the belief that it is better to be killed by the enemy, and die with your chin up, than to compromise with sin.

As for Brave Horatius, I think that he and Franz Jagerstatter would find common ground in the belief that it is better to be killed by the enemy, and die with your chin up, than to compromise with sin.

Quaker-style? Do you believe it is better to be conquered than for your soldiers to kill enemy soldiers?

Define "conquered", because I feel that that might actually be one of the fundamental disconnects here.

First, in the literal, Ukrainian sense. Second, in the cultural, Uyghur sense.

...and I would reply by questioning whether either of those groups have actually been "conquered" in a meaningful sense.

I get that the Motte skews heavily pro-Russia and pro-CCP relative to the wider population but given that we're now in the 11th month of a special operation that was only supposed to last 3 weeks perhaps a reevaluation is in order.

Do you seriously question that, but for its soldiers committing acts such as killing, Ukraine would be conquered? Surely it's not moral superiority and unwillingness to meet evil with evil on the part of the Ukrainian Army that is holding the Russians at bay, right?

Yes I seriously question it.

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