site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   30072 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 21, 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.

14
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

So far his debate performance is reinforcing my negative view of him. Great ideas but way too much slick, fast talking car salesman suspicious overeagerness.

Really? I find him pretty charismatic. Maybe my grifter alarms are less fine tuned than others here.

We always complain that are political leaders are in shambles but then try to pick politicians based on…how electric they are? Vivek has no record and therefore is per se an invalid candidate.

Let’s look at people who actually have records that can be judged and see if those records suggest they are strong candidates.

I don't think he's uncharismatic. Good grifters and great salesmen are charasmatic But he's a salesman not a showman (like trump) and he's clearly a pushy fast talking one at that.

He speaks like someone who did a lot of college/school debate and/or went to toastmasters or a similar thing. The problem is that advice or support for people who are bad at public speaking often involves essentially teaching them to adopt the mannerisms of a radio shock jock / car salesman and while the most charismatic people can pull it off some of the time, the less of a natural you are, the greasier it becomes.

I'll also add that being a good public speaker matters far less than you think it does socially. I've got the hyperlexic flavor of autism. I'm a decent writer and an excellent public speaker - probably top one percent or so if you're looking at a general population sample. In college, I moved my speech professor to tears with an impromptu speech on love, of all things. This buys me a tiny bit of social inclusion, but a 400lb deadlift would get me as much or more.

I think it matters but it’s very profession-dependent. The verbal IQ savant who is lazy and feckless but who has the ultimate gift of charisma can do well in a handful of professions, but certainly not most of them.

Is that how debate watcher or primary voter will read him, though? I think Vivek did a lot better than everyone else from that perspective. These voters are the kinds of people who listen to the radio and buy those cars, anyway.

Yeah he's smart and well spoken on podcasts, but his combative look is not good. Though maybe his early Trump impression is resonating. It's hard for me to say... In other news wtf is Pence or Christie's goal here?

I get that several on the stage are going for the 'hope everyone in front of them drops dead" strategy, but these two are basically just here to telegraph how out of touch they are with the party.

Drudge's post debate poll had Christie coming in second after Ramaswamy as the winner of the debate. So a far right news base, at least the over 50,000 of them that participated so far, seem to think Christie did a good job. Not as good as Ramaswamy, but a bit better than Haley and Desantis, and way better than anyone else.

https://poll.fm/12675305/results?msg=voted

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