site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   28318 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 23, 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.

6
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This statue was erected in the 20th century. They were winning the culture war at that time.

They lost the conventional war 150 years ago, not the culture war.

The statues are the last thing to go, after everything else.

The statues being destroyed precedes the people the statues represent being destroyed.

people the statues represent

Confederates?

Americans.

I feel it would be a strange choice to represent Americans as a whole by a man who fought in a war specifically to not be American. (Assuming by "America" you refer to the United States of America and not to the American continent as a whole, but in the latter case I don't see how you can't consider Hispanics to be not American too). I'll admit I'm not American in either sense, so there might well be a third interpretation I haven't thought of yet.

Well, he was Virginian, not American, but the statue was built fifty years after his death, by Americans who had chosen him to represent them.

Well it sounds like they want to replace it with a statue of a different American, so I guess it's a wash.

Did I miss something?

Just what you wrote:

slated to be replaced with some statue for black people

This statue was erected in the 20th century. They were winning the culture war at that time.

The Union states allowed the South to put up some Lee statues and teach the lost cause as a consolation prize in the early 20th century for being politically, culturally and economically fucked by Yankees, and this counts as winning the culture war?

What counts as winning the culture war is resisting then ending Reconstruction within 12 years of the end of the lost conventional war.

The confederates lost the conventional war and won the culture war.

In the end slavery ended, reconstruction ended, segregation ended, the south was forcibly integrated by the federal government with minimal resistance, and Southerners today are among the most patriotic good little Americans with the Stars and Stripes flying behind their picket fences. So again, what culture war did they really win?

The one that allowed them to raise all the statues, name all the bases, and revere their own figures, probably. And that forcible integration went both ways. Where did Jim Crow come from if not from the culture of the South? The war they lost wasn't 150 years ago, it was 50 years ago. You're off by a full century, at least.

Is there any point in the 150 years since the end of the Civil War where, looking at the United States, Confederates would have more positive opinions of how things went culturally than the Yankees? The tasteful statues dedicated to them aside.

Even people who publicly fly the Stars and Bars mostly do it to piss off their domestic opponents, not because of any real ideological affinity to Confederates. It's almost certainly positively correlated with flying the same Star Spangled Banner that killed a quarter million Confederates.

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