site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   30386 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 8, 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.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I will never dismiss comments like these because I don't have all the answers. But how could we possibly know if this was the case?

You can't know unless you are inside, and telling anyone else has a best case outcome of ending up like Snowdon, so you can't know unless you know, in which case you already know but if you don't then you won't.

Then how do you know? There must be some information out there you are basing this on besides the existence of intelligence agencies in Anglo countries.

I don't know, I suspect based on inference. The Great War On Terror and all the fabrications by various intelligence agencies to shift public opinion (The UKs involvement with the Iraq war famously being due to a fake intelligence dossier and the astroturfed media coverage to pump public opinion away from the popular anti war sentiment of the time), Snowdon leaks, twitter leaks, plus various bits of covid narrative direction mediated by intelligence agencies, such as the FBI in the US or the role of E.g., the 77th brigade in the UK, paint a picture of a dispersed intelligence apparatus that does shift narratives and have a dominant, final, say in the anglospheres mood and man on the street opinion.

With that basis influencing me to assume it's more likely than not to be intelligence agencies manipulating opinion. When I see a sudden massive set of Anglo country wide social and cultural changes being implimented and enforced from the top down with manufactured media driven consensus, my default assumption isn't that it's a bottom up phenonomenon driven by academic marxists, economic conditions, racism, people struggling for equality out of true belief in it or whatever, but that the well funded groups of people across the world hegemonic powerstructure who have a track record of doing things like this, and have plausible reasons for doing it, very wwrll might be doing it and I will need very solid evidence to update away from that. When it comes to the culture war, my null hypothesis is the 5 eyes intelligence community probably did it or influenced the start of whatever it is.

and have plausible reasons for doing it

What reasons do intelligence agencies have to promote wokeism and social division?

Edit: Just read your comment below. So you're claiming "the powers that be" are sowing division because if people were not divided into two groups arguing with one another, they would unite and overthrow them?

Yup pretty much, although not necessarily unite in totality. Just a larger populist movement is possible drawing from.all the population than half, and that if its ire is directed at government and property ownership systems instead of the other half of the population then this is something to be avoided at all costs.

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