site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   27522 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 6, 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.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The things that ZHP and others want - abolishing women's suffrage, pushing all gays back into the closet, racial segregation - are political non-starters, and not just in America: these positions would be completely insane to advocate for in most countries.

Most Western countries perhaps, but the world is bigger than that.

The way Western countries are going, policies don't need to be advocated to a larger audience. Gathering a few families with 4+ children and setting them up in a given area should give you essentially the same thing. Nobody can stop White Flight. The difficulty is really on everything else. What are you willing to give up to live in racial segregation, etc?

So who exactly is the target audience here except the terminally online?

People like you apparently, never seen that website before you posted it.

I’d say it’s part of that general constellation of long form ‘magazines’ on the dissident right, it has some moderately prominent meme figures like Michael Anton, BAP, Moldbug, Anna from RSP who have written for it.

These are all ersatz-places because Twitter, where these people congregate, is bad for long form content (even with the character limit removed). Thus these blogs need to exist for essayposting. Reminds me of how good we have it here, where such a thing is unnecessary.

I don’t think ZHPL is necessarily wrong here. There are plenty of historic examples of society rejecting previously held beliefs. Rome embraced Catholicity and ended up rejecting homosexuality and banning crucifixion. Weimar Germany was a pretty libertine society with open homosexuality and cross dressing. Embrace of Islam curbed the excesses of Persia.

People respond to the movements that are alpha-masculine and forcefully say “this is what we’re doing now. Get on board”. The Catholic willing to die rather than bend the knee, the Muslim willing to fight, kill and die for Islam, the German paramilitary groups willing to get down and dirty — these can have a profound effect on how the rest of the society sees social issues. I think it’s the very act of being willing to confront society head-on without hesitation. People will always follow the strong willing to lead.

“When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature they will like the strong horse.”

Yeah, there’s no guarantee that people correctly assess which horse is strong. Or that willingness to lead actually implies strength.

People's opinion don't matter, only power matters, and will is a necessary prerequisite to it and one of the main deciders of who endures.

If an organized minority group faces an opposition that does not believe in its own legitimacy, they win, even if their ideas are unpopular. There is endless historical precedent of that.

Few wanted bolchevism, few wanted Mussolini. But that does not enter into it. Will is not the only component of political strength, but it is an important one.

Be that as it may, it’s not what OP was arguing with

People will always follow the strong willing to lead.

Nobody can stop White Flight.

I think they'd try if the trickle became a deluge. I'm reminded of how difficult it is to give up US citizenship (to avoid paying tax while living overseas). Basically you used to need to pay US$2k+ and prove 5 years of IRS tax compliance. Also exit taxes if you own more than $2 million.

I think they'd try if the trickle became a deluge.

If the trickle becomes a deluge then the country will be in such a state that they won't have much capacity to go after dissidents.

Nobody can stop White Flight.

Don't confuse people who want to escape a shithole, ruined by woke policies, with people who want to found a rebirth of Pureblood Aryan Nation. There are a lot of the former that won't want anything to do with the latter. Even wider - a lot of people who object to child transitions, kid drag shows and other insanities don't actually mind if two adult dudes fuck each other, if they'd like so. The interests of these groups can be aligned while the environment is so insanely skewed that their differences are immaterial, but that doesn't mean they share the same core values with regard to aryan stuff.

And, I think it’s notable to point out, red tribe hardliner normies who think homosexuality is wrong, climate change doesn’t exist, public schooling should be significantly reduced in spread, the COVID vaccine was harmful, etc- most of these people are not aryan race warriors. Rebirthing the pure blood aryan nation is a minority of a minority of a minority.

There are a lot of the former that won't want anything to do with the latter. Even wider - a lot of people who object to child transitions, kid drag shows and other insanities don't actually mind if two adult dudes fuck each other, if they'd like so.

Well they can join the pro-homo commune if that's a central value to them. I don't see a way to rollback the Progress™ to LGB without the T, a sort of 2000s conservatism, without risking the Progress to re-roll back in immediately, like it already did in the 2010s.

I think a lot of people don't care that much about the 'two adults behind closed doors' problem, but the community has moved way past that a long time ago.

None of the things that you characterize as 'insanities' would exist if their perpetrators were shamed into the 'closet', or better, if they were not able to propagate the very idea of them.

Again, nobody will choose to isolate themselves into enclaves or move to less-technologically-advanced countries if they did not feel strongly about any of these issues.

I don't expect this to happen before some major political changes, perhaps a full-on Covid-style ban on freedom of association, ban on homeschooling, massive zoning changes... Could take 5 years like it could take 20.

Well they can join the pro-homo commune if that's a central value to them.

That's the point, it's almost never is a central value either way. Shaming homoes into the closet is not something most people would put any serious effort into, and specifically making the community as welcome to homoes as humanly possible would not be a valuable effort for most either. "I DNGAF" would be the most common position by now, I suspect. 2 centuries ago it might be different, but by now it'd be no more interesting either way than, say, dudes that jerk off to tentacle porn. Not something worth the effort either way.

None of the things that you characterize as 'insanities' would exist if their perpetrators were shamed into the 'closet', or better, if they were not able to propagate the very idea of them.

This may be true, but in a useless way. There are a lot of hypothetical worlds where it wouldn't happen. If Al Qaeda took over the US, it wouldn't happen. If Soviet Union took over the world, it wouldn't happen. If we didn't have democracy or free speech, it wouldn't happen. Etc. etc. The problem here is not to find one hypothetical world where it wouldn't happen, that's easy. The problem is to find one where it didn't happen but some other things that we still want to happen happened. And that's a much more complex question.

Again, nobody will choose to isolate themselves into enclaves or move to less-technologically-advanced countries if they did not feel strongly about any of these issues.

Well, Amish do exist, and they seem to have mostly sustainable model of existence, given two things are true: a) they don't want to have absolutely any influence at all with the outside world and no contact with it as much as possible and b) the outside world is fine with them existing. You don't really need to move anywhere for the former - there are enough remote places in the US where nobody would care much what's going on in there if it stays in there - but for the latter, especially if you're dealing with globalist totalitarian ideology and you let it win, you'd have to move very, very far.

That's the point, it's almost never is a central value either way. Shaming homoes into the closet is not something most people would put any serious effort into, and specifically making the community as welcome to homoes as humanly possible would not be a valuable effort for most either.

Wouldn't a commune explicitly founded for (white) adults with 4+ children pretty much have roughly ~0% out-of-the-closet homosexuals? This was the premise :

Gathering a few families with 4+ children and setting them up in a given area should give you essentially the same thing.

Not something worth the effort either way.

Literally 0 additional effort to what is arguably a pretty arduous task.

You don't really need to move anywhere for the former - there are enough remote places in the US where nobody would care much what's going on in there if it stays in there - but for the latter, especially if you're dealing with globalist totalitarian ideology and you let it win, you'd have to move very, very far.

Idk how much the 'globalist totalitarian ideology' can win if they can't get their people to breed and even go out of their way to sterilize their own members. Moving anywhere is still a much easier endeavor than whatever is required in the short-term to get rid of the regime.

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