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.

I think signing on the R ticket and declaring we give too much money to Ukraine and Israel is a really bad way to grift. If you’re alleging he is in it for pure personal gain, that’s the last thing he would do. That’s alienating establishment political apparatus and pro-Israel donors.

I think signing on the R ticket and declaring we give too much money to Ukraine and Israel is a really bad way to grift

Why is it bad? For Ukraine, it is increasingly becoming blue-coded issue, so running against it on a red ticket is at least a safe bet. Jews are dominantly voting blue, and big Jewish donors are already spoken for anyway, nobody of them would have any interest in some start-up nobody that they had no idea of his existence a month ago. So he loses nothing. On the contrary, in this very forum we can witness a certain group of people who, let's say, do not harbor any warm feelings towards Jews, and thus would gladly support somebody dunking on Israel. This group may not be huge, but it's still some money. Again, from the fundraising angle, maybe not the best strategy ever, but certainly a solid one. If he already going for polarizing candidate - which he seems to do anyway - taking positions with significant unserved red audience is not a stupid move, grift-wise.

Do people ever purposefully sell their social currency among the highest status to purchase social currency among the lower status? He works in pharma finance. Pro-establishment Jews and pro-establishment gentiles are his clientele, colleagues, and social judges.

My point is pro-establishment Jews vote Democrat, so Vivek, being a Republican candidate, can have no currency with them. To gain any possibility of their approval, he'd have to run as a Democrat for starters. Since he doesn't, he has to address some audience where he has a chance.

I think signing on the R ticket and declaring we give too much money to Ukraine and Israel is a really bad way to grift.

That's an absolutely exceptional way to grift. People like Trump and Kari Lake have been doing it for years and raking in the small dollar donations by the millions for years.

When are you people going to realize that you are the establishment. You are the power now, so every time you sneer about the establishment neocons what you're actually doing is sneering as the heel to the face. The """"establishment"""" is terrified of voters that think like you do and have been bending over and spreading wide for almost a decade to try to please you. All they've gotten for it is cascading electoral failure. As someone who likes it when Republicans win, I'm not very happy about that.

You're not grifting off big name donors, you're grifting the rank and file schmucks.

Why would you grift from the poor when you could grift from the rich? Makes no sense.

Too many people already on the rich's teats. Hard to distinguish oneself, especially when they insist on things like "respectability" and "experience" in their circles to join the establishment.

Much easier to just skip the entire cursus honorum and the years of ass-kissing and dues-paying it demands.

Theory: There are more of the poor, and they might be easier to grift and less likely to sue you.

The Jordan Belfort story.

That's if you assume the end goal of the grift is to get elected, rather than to get enough attention that he gets a permanent podcast presence.

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