site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   29605 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 2, 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.

11
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I just watch the money I float in my checking accounts go up 70k every couple months and most of it goes into investments that will only be dinged if the government of the USA collapses; recission proof and inflation proof and 98% risk free.

The best-yielding thing that's close to inflation proof, recession proof, and risk free right now is a 6-month T-bill at 5.578 percent. To make 70k every couple of months from that, you need $7.2 million, which you're not going to get by sitting on mid-6 figures of investments for 1.5 generations.

I know that my solution (radical wealth redistribution, red-black shit at large, etc and so forth) isn't popular here

For some reason such solutions always seek to redistribute wealth away even from those who didn't inherit the bulk of their money. My own gain from inheritance currently stands at zero; I'm not keen on solutions which would strip me of my retirement -- the one I saved and invested for myself -- based on some sort of class envy of trust-fund kids and Hunter Biden-type failsons.

To make 70k every couple of months from that, you need $7.2 million, which you're not going to get by sitting on mid-6 figures of investments for 1.5 generations.

It's only 6% a year. Why isn't that possible? The real problem is that you're going to lose most of that 5.578% to inflation. A 2% real return per year is more realistic, which means you need $21 million and 8.7% real growth a year.

Assuming I was in this position, I would probably want to go farther out ..maybe 20+ years even if it means only 4%. the problem with those juicy 5.5% short term yields is that at any hint of job weakness/recession, they gonna drop like a rock, so will only enjoy those fat returns for about a year. With a 20-30 year bond, you lock in 4% or more for a quarter century even if real returns are slightly negative now.

For some reason such solutions always seek to redistribute wealth away even from those who didn't inherit the bulk of their money.

I think it's tall poppy syndrome.

People can accept that someone has money because they were born into an advantageous position. People can't accept that someone has money because they are smart, better, or worked harder.

Witness the insane amount of cope trying to paint Elon Musk's slightly wealthy father as some sort of plutocrat.

People can accept that someone has money because they were born into an advantageous position

or that they dislike elon musk so that is the most effective attack . the right does it for Mark Zuckerberg too "he stole facebook"

the right does it for Mark Zuckerberg too "he stole facebook"

This doesn't feel accurate to me. I don't think the right sees Zuck as untalented, merely evil. Zuckerberg isn't even really left coded either. No matter how much money he gives to far left causes, he's not really one of them. "Zuck stole Facebook" isn't right coded or left coded. It's low-IQ coded.

But I take your point that tall poppy syndrome is not confined to the left.

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