site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   31951 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 22, 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.

Latinos have always been white for me. If you are from European descent and culturally Christian you are white. You don't have to be A4 skin color.

Edit: To sound cynical - it is every American's god given right to look down to blacks and natives (the same way for Europeans with gypsies). And when you remove that right they become cranky. So one can expect a lot of Asian and Indian "white" supremacists in next couple of years. Not only Hispanic. The whole point of the social pyramid is not to be at the bottom.

This is what SJW's mean when they say white isn't an ethnicity it's a 'constructed position of power'. The category of white people has expanded and can expand further because it's not defined by a skin tone it's a coalition of people who have a God given right to look down on black people.

No it is also about ethnicity. My theory a couple of years ago was that if you are descendant from country that has become economic powerhouse - you become honorary white. Japanese became that in the 80s, Koreans in the 90s, Chinese in 2000s.

Indians are not there yet - if India develops they will become, but Indian Muslims will have harder time. The same way headscarfed Turks, Bosnians and Albanians are in their separate category.

TLDR: To be white you also have to eat pork :)

Have you seen these alt right rallies of the last 7 years? Half the people are at least half Hispanic, Asian or Indian. American racial politics is fundamentally blacks vs everyone else. Most of the Asians and Indians who act very woke and talk about white supremacy are just a slightly darker shade of the white progressives they so hope to emulate.

Woke politics really is a dream come true for Brahmins in the West.

You get to echo the high-status politics of the ruling class, play the oppression card yourself when appropriate, and still hate and oppress lower Indian castes without anyone really caring.

Brahmins in the west, at least America, don't care at all about caste. It's not something relevant here.

American racial politics is fundamentally blacks (and upper-class whites, and single women, and people still influenced by the slowly-dying "third-worldist" leftism popular in the latter years of the Cold War) vs everyone else.

FTFY

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