site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   33353 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 27, 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 the hell do you think it's going to happen once economic conditions worsen even more ?

Nothing. I think nothing will happen.

The frog will boil a little more, but as long as the crime rate keeps creeping up 1% per month instead of 5000% per day, people will just... get robbed more. As long as the electrical brownouts keep extending 1% per month instead of 5000% per day, people will just... adapt to doing their cooking in advance rather than on demand.

When I was in South Africa I noticed a lot of private security stickers on people's houses and plenty of people had generators to make up for the power outages. I'm not sure how affordable either of these are for the average middle class South African, but with access to those things you are somewhat more sheltered from the decline. For people who can afford these things the streets will get less safe and doing business will become more of a hassle, but you can still pick where you travel and where you do your shopping.

So you think a state can completely fail, and a country with a very heterogenous ethnic composition but that's about 70% black, at least will still somehow keep being peaceful and won't devolve into conditions resembling a civil war?

What kind of civil war? Wars involving organized armies with "front lines" and uniformed combatants who follow the orders of politically-oriented hierarchies, and engage in organized "battles" are actually quite rare - particularly so in Africa. Do I think there will be a lot of tribal raiding? That people will cluster together in defensible mottes and skirmish in the bailey that is the rest of the country? Sure. But in order for the bailey to be worth anything, it can't be so bad there that no-one can farm it. Certain minimal levels of productivity will be allowed to remain, because if anyone looks like they might be behaving so badly that the bailey will be ruined, everyone else will gang up on them as hostis humani generis. And because the "legitimate" governmental structures are part of that bailey (e.g. trade, SEOs, access to international credit and markets, intergovernmental aid and relations, etc.), they'll be fought-over too in lieu of groups officially splitting off or declaring a new state or anything like that.

But in order for the bailey to be worth anything, it can't be so bad there that no-one can farm it.

..you know, I think you're overestimating the rationality of people in general.

If you're going to lose access to something because of a defeat, burning it to deny it to the enemy is something most ethnics are ready to do.

If tragedy of the commons happens in peaceful conditions, do you think it is less likely to happen in conditions of endemic ethnic strife ?

The tragedy of the commons is about the slow devouring of a resource no-one wants to sacrifice to upkeep. Im not aware of anywhere in the fact pattern that anyone maliciously destroys the common so others can't have 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