site banner
PaperclipPerfector  7mo ago (text post)   26633 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 25, 2024

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.

7
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You could replace Biden with a rock that read "VETO ALL INCOMING BILLS", and I doubt his popularity among that fringe would shift. Not enough for a statistically significant change in the odds of, say, shooting up a post office.

I'm not talking about changing regulations, I'm talking about choosing to launch a no-knock raid on a guy who probably could have been picked up at work with a minimum of fuss. The Feds probably already have assets in a regional airport that could have arrested him! The feds aren't going to increase the odds of shooting up a post office, they're going to increase the odds of another Waco, by aggressively creating standoffs between such people and police.

This is the perennial complaint against many police raids on homes. "You could have just picked him up while he was driving to work or the store." David Koresh liked to jog around town. They could have grabbed him and stuffed him into a van whenever they wanted. But the ATF wanted a showy raid, and they sure as hell got one.

Alright, I muddled the issue re: post offices.

My point was that if Biden took absolutely no actions, there would still be a risk of a Waco. The anti-government fringe would still be roughly as powerful, and I expect anti-anti-government agencies would be just as likely to use a heavy hand. They’ve been doing so for decades, even when it has no route to influencing an election.

and I expect anti-anti-government agencies would be just as likely to use a heavy hand

I don’t think that’s actually true, I think they’re desperately trying to prove they’re doing something about the real terror threat- white guys with right wing views.

What makes you say that?

Here we have an example of the ATF killing someone for pushing the envelope on existing gun laws. He wasn't politicizing it, he wasn't wanted for hate crimes or funding a revolution or, I dunno, being in D.C. a couple Januaries back. This isn't the FBI. No one said anything about terror threats. Other commenters have argued that this fits cleanly into the same strategic ambiguity that the ATF has been abusing for decades.

So why is it evidence of a desperate push?

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