site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   33253 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 20, 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.

15
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The idea that a violent white supremacist actually knows what a Yoruba is seems both extremely spurious and a hilarious mistake to make.

While that's true your average /pol/ poster couldn't distinguish a Yoruba from a brand of tea. This is 100% false flag. Also notice the awkward use of "Cell" in the first line.

Honestly hardcore far-rightists often go deep into obscure ethnic trivia

Usually involving groups close to them and/or they have a long history of enmity with.

This sort of thing is exactly what I expect from a far-right...Nigerian.

IME in the West people almost never give a shit about specific ethnic groups like Yoruba unless they're standing in for countries.

EDIT: Except maybe HBD nerds who care about the Igbo IQ rates vs. other SSA ethnic groups. But they're not the ones who usually do things like this.

They may know the differences, but it's unlikely they'd emphasize it in a threat to a Yoruba person if they want both Igbo and Yoruba and everybody else from African descent out. It's like I would be pretending to be an antisemite and were writing a letter to threaten a Jew and said "you filthy left-handed Jew!". "Left-handed" here is weird because if I were a real antisemite then I'd hate both right-handed and left-handed and ambidextrous Jews. However, if I were a left-handed people's rights activist who for some reason decided to pretend to be an antisemite, then the issue of handedness would be fresh on my mind, and grasping for an appropriate insult, I might just reach for it. Thus, it is likely that the letter was written by somebody for whom this distinction is very important and fresh on their minds.

Spitting facts! I, for one, endorse the idea that Yoruba are meaningfully different from Igbo, though this would be fantastically beside the point when the target is defined by her politics. It is not inconceivable for this to be mentioned. In the immortal words of Hakan Rotwrmt (RIP, even the archive):

High-quality racism is extraordinarily hard work. You have to have working recall of at minimum eight or nine thousand distinct races, living and extinct, and run extensive simulations just to model the disgusting attributes of the most easily conceivable 2- &3-way crosses.

On the other hand, the screed, for all its uninspired vitriol, conspicuously doesn't insult her or her people's intelligence. It's overwhelmingly dirt, pure racial antagonism, and some envy: troublemaker, liar, grifter, filthy, ugly, nigger, gorilla, smelly, poopy-head, monkey, parasite, go away, give us back our space, our air, we want your nice house with nice garden (at least no mention of her nice TV). Honestly this is something I'd expect an upper-class black person with an inflated self-esteem and limited self-awareness to attribute to anti-black racists – mostly projecting one's naive tribal hatred. Assuming she wrote this, Dr. Adeshola (Twitter verified) cannot conceive of herself as not being clever, even when trying to put herself in the shoes of her mortal enemy. And indeed, she is an Author, Lawyer, Political & Women's Rights Activist, Founder. Not even a completely unhinged murderous racist would think to call her stupid! On this matter, I see that while white liberals have veeery specific pained reactions to the IQ discourse, most blacks act refreshingly casual, as if they do not distinguish it from generic poop-on-your-head invectives.

...Alternatively, she is quite aware of this and other rhetorical deficiencies, but wouldn't like to publish anything online that reminds people (to wit, those oversensitive white liberals) of hate-facts and, especially on occasion of the hoax being exposed, would get her in real hot water.

On the gripping hand, this is so bad it almost looks like a second order hoax. We'd accuse Shola of doing a Jussie Smolliay, then Bobbies apprehend real National Action London. In 2 years will be revealed as a honeypot with 15/20 undercover agents, but that won't be known far outside Steve Sailer's feed – unlike the boy-who-cried wolf moral lesson that we should believe victims and not assume hoaxes.

Or Jello Biafra.

Twitter autists aren’t the ones doing IRL white supremacist terrorism, they’re calling trans women ugly on the internet. IRL white supremacist attacks are mostly carried out by the same sorts of people who do other kinds of real life violence, who are fantastically unlikely to know their yorubas from their Hutus.

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