site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   29600 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 6, 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.

11
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

No, "past peak woke" would be when the people pushing woke innovations are getting punished, and the people reversing established woke innovations are not getting punished and sometimes succeeding.

"Peak woke" -- or better, "woke plateau" -- would be when someone pushing a woke innovation or trying to make new offense cancellable is as likely to get punished as someone who is calling out and trying to cancel out existing woke norms is likely to get canceled.

I think that would be true if "people pushing woke innovations get punished" was the main way that woke culture lost traction. However, I think that the change is driven much more strongly by whether people on the margin view these new woke innovations as credible or whether they nod while making snide comments to their trusted friends.

I don't think woke culture dies by a coordinated counterculture pushing back on its excesses. I think woke culture dies by becoming uncool, a sign that you are not keeping up with the modern times.

I actually suspect that the beginning of the end for woke culture was the moment that big banks started making floats for pride parades. Nothing is less cool than a big bank trying to show how cool and with the times they are.

For the record, I think that peak woke was probably about 2 years ago, though the exact timing of the peak depends on which exact part of "woke" you're talking about. Concretely:

  • I think the idea of "colorblindness" peaked a couple decades ago

  • I think the idea of "cultural appropriation" probably peaked in 2018ish

  • Cultural battles over "trans rights" are probably either still on the upswing or near peak

  • I expect that there will be some new "deviant" thing that is currently outside the overton window (e.g. polyamory / furries / etc) that will be taken up by the successors of woke ideology.

Nothing is less cool than a big bank trying to show how cool and with the times they are.

What makes you believe that this is so?

To a normie, banks are just these things that are part of the environment, like trees, grass, and television news broadcasts. A bank supporting something won't make it more cool, but it won't make it less cool, either.

I think television news broadcasts are uncool in the same way banks are, though not in the way that trees and grass are.

My impression of normies, and particularly of the type of normies that exhibit "woke" sentiments, are usually pretty anti-establishment, despite the establishment trying to pander to them. So my judgement about banks is mostly driven by the idea that banks are about as "establishment" as you can get, and when the establishment starts supporting your ideas, you need new, better ideas that the establishment is not willing to support to prove that you are not one of them.

fair-weather alliances like corporate rainbow-washing and blackbox posting

Is that a fair-weather alliance? It always struck me more as a deliberate plot of the corporate sector to subvert anti-establishment sentiment.

I'm probably using a non-standard definition of normies. I'm not sure there is a standard definition of "normie".

The context was "to a normie, banks are just these things that are part of the environment", which was in the broader context of "to someone inclined to be woke, banks are uncool", so I was figuring we were operating under a very broad definition of "normie" that included "woke" people.

Channeling moldbug, people won't see the bank as uncool without a concerted effort to smear it as uncool, which people mistake for an organic uncoolness factor after decades of "activism."

Similar to people expecting a wave of youth reaction because "teens naturally rebel against authority," when in reality the media and education industries can and have just flipped the switch from "rebellion is cool" to "total conformity is cool."

Colorblindness has never been acceptable to "woke" and was part of the liberal predecessor before racism became cool again. [...] I'm not sure of the inclusion here. Representing the brief overlap period where colorblindness was collapsing and woke was ascendent?

Yes, you're correct. I don't think "woke" is a new phenomenon, I think "woke" is the way the current young generation shows that they "get it" in a way that the older generation does not. And yes, representing how the current idea of "woke" was ascendant while the previous version of "politically correct" was collapsing. My point was at no point does "we are past peak X" mean "and that means that everything will go back to how it was before", it just means that "X" is now unfashionable and will be replaced by a new, fashionable "Y".

And yeah, the "poly / furries" thing is the classic prediction for what the new "Y" will be, but I'm pretty sure it's actually going to be "etc", because if it were the predictable "poly/furries" then the old uncool people could easily "get it", and that would be terrible.

(As a note, I'm not saying "wokeness is just fashion and therefore has no effects on the real world". I'm saying "wokeness is fashion, and therefore you can predict what will happen with it the same way you predict other fashions". Any real-world consequences of things done for fashion are still just as real as real-world consequences of things done for other reasons)

That is a really interesting perspective, and it makes a lot of sense. I have always viewed it as a fashion, but I hadn't considered the poison pill aspect like that. Ooh, how about instead of poly/trans we go with "chatbots not being real people doesn't matter, they are real enough for me and you disrespect them when you call them artificial". Wrap your head around that Dad!

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