@Amadan's banner p

Amadan

Letting the hate flow through me

10 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 00:23:21 UTC
Verified Email 

				
User ID: 297


				
				
				

			

		

	














	


		


			



	

		

			

			

				

					

						

							
						

						

							
							

								
Amadan


								

								

								
								
									
								
								
								
								

								
							
					
 
				


				
Letting the hate flow through me

				
				
				

				

					10 followers  

					follows 0 users  

					joined 2022 September 05 00:23:21 UTC
				


				
					

					
No bio...

				

				

				

				

				

					

					

					
					
					

					
User ID: 297


					
					
					
				

			


					

						
							
								Verified Email
							
						
					



		

	

 











			
			

			
			

			




	


		

			
‎

			

				
				

					Hour
					Day
					Week
					Month
					Year
					
				

			


			
‎

			

	
	

	 Hot Bump Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
	



		

	






	

		
		

		
		
	

	

  







		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 16, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
If you don't like the rules you can raise it with us and we'll discuss it (but this particular rule has been discussed repeatedly and we are very unlikely to change our minds). Telling someone else to set themselves up for a ban is definitely not going to move the needle.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 16, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Okay, this is just linkspam.


Yeah, some of it is kind of interesting. Like a listicle or a "You won't believe..." TikTok or YouTube thumbnail is interesting.


We have rules against low-effort posts that are just collections of culture war fodder. No, we are not going to bring back the link roundup. That is not what this place is for.


Don't do this again.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 16, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Superb execution of Poe's Law.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 16, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
When people write screeds like this about feminism, in my mind I always wonder "Which kind of feminism"? Because nowadays, "feminism" means pretty much whatever the person using the word wants it to mean, whether that is "Women should be able to vote" or "Evil civilization-hating penis-removing witches."


It's not just that there have been many different waves and schools of feminist thought, it's that it literally has become such a generic term that essentially anything other than a neolithic model of gender relations can be called "feminist." That's not even an exaggeration when we have people here on the Motte who literally believe that women should be property and it's those fucking bitch feminists who are the reason they aren't.


This is my personal opinion, not a mod note, but "feminism is a mind virus," "feminism is objectively false," "feminism is cancer," etc. reads as very boo-outgroup to me when you don't even specify what you mean by it. Generally I assume you more or less mean modern progressive feminism, 3rd wave or whatever, sex positivity and equal rights etc. etc. And before you think I'm white knighting or some shit, I think I have made it clear enough in the past that I largely agree with the criticisms of modern feminism. But I don't think someone who believes "Women should be allowed to vote" or "It should be illegal to beat your wife" is the same as someone who's pushing whatever specific progressive feminist thing is enraging you.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 16, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


No, because the consequences of getting it wrong are very different.




So I have made an argument similar to this (but notably, not the same) and gotten heat for it, so allow me to say that I agree with those who are pointing out that truth should not depend on the social consequences. If something is true, even if that truth is hard, uncomfortable, and leads to unfortunate implications, that doesn't make it not true and you cannot demand people pretend that it is.


What you can demand is that we be very sure of it, and that we exercise extreme caution when deciding what to do about it. Which would be the steelman of what what you seem to be saying. What I was accused of was defending the "Noble Lie" (i.e., "We all collectively understand this is true but we must pretend we don't know it"). Which is not something I defend.


Where I differ from you is that you seem pretty set on "It would be so bad if this was true, that we must demand absolute 100% certainty, on the level of knowing that gravity exists, before we acknowledge it."


I don't agree that recognizing that there are racial differences in IQ and behavior would inevitably lead to racial oppression. I do agree that would be a risk. What I think it would lead to is some really hard choices and a lot of people unable to accept public policy that stops trying to "correct" a situation that is essentially not correctable. I don't know that we as a society could come to some sort of stable equilibrium where everyone is treated with dignity (and as an individual, not a demographic median!).


Nonetheless, I think we do still kind of need to know and face the truth.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 16, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
While I am somewhat more sympathetic to trans people than @FtttG, I agree with him that I see trans people use this "Why do you want to know what's in our pants? Ewwwww!" framing all the time, and it is really annoying and disingenuous.


No one on the gender critical side "wants to know what's in your pants." Most gender critical people don't think trans women belong in women's spaces whether or not the trans woman has a penis. While some (particularly in the radical feminist fringe) might have a particular horror of penises, it's not just the penis that makes the man, so to speak.


You can disagree with gender criticals and their desire to exclude trans women from women's spaces, but I think @FtttG is justified in being annoyed when you try to reduce it to a cheap accusation of being some kind of pervert obsessed with genitals.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 16, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


I'm going to say something I can't truly back up but I'm noticing the belief forming so I'll throw it out there




You should use the feedback you are getting to appreciate the Motte for its true purpose, which is to test (and sometimes discard) your shady ideas. Because as a number of people have pointed out, the right is not lacking in sexual predators, or the tendency to close ranks to protect their own.


What you are noticing is that leftist sexual predators are of a particular type, which is somewhat different than rightist sexual predators. Right-wingers who like to do a little groomin', rapin', and molestin' generally don't make excuses for it (unless it's part of some religious cult thing); they just do it (if they can get away with it) and hide it (if their followers would not approve). Whereas leftists will try to wrap it in their ideology, hence all the "male feminist" sex pests, hence all the grooming by professors and creatives and academics and the like of adoring female acolytes (though this is not a lot different than "grooming" of groupies by rock stars back in the day), hence the current wave of "polyamory"-related implosions.


So you aren't wrong to notice that there is a... kind of thing that is particular to the left. You're just wrong to think that this kind of thing is part of the fundamental psychology of leftists, and not just the same thing fundamental to the psychology of basically all amoral people with means, motive, and opportunity, but styled in a particularly leftist way.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				The American Renewal Act: A 127-Point Systems-Level Overhaul (Citizen Juries, 20% Market Cap, and a New Constitutional Anchor)
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Okay, that's enough. I missed the initial post and another mod approved it even though it looked suspicious, but generally we do not let a new user join the Motte and post a manifesto as their first entry. The more I read the more I am convinced someone has pointed OpenClaw at the Motte.


Y'all took the bait, but so did the mods. This is the future, folks- forums getting trolled by ClawBots.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


What all of these groups have in common is that they hold the Talmud in high regard




This thread started with your tender heart bleeding for the poor Palestinians, and when I accused you of not actually caring about Palestinians but only being obsessed with Jews, you…. shifted to screeds about how (almost) all Jews are conniving liars and cheats and the Talmud is evil.


I rest my case.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


So you ask me how I feel about a “group” but refuse to define it.




This is an untruth. It is you who do not define your terms when you say "they" and "the groups behind all this." Because you like to remain weaselly and evasive on the Jewish Question. Most JQ posters are evasive on the topic of what exactly they want to do about Jews (i.e, how they would personally answer the Jewish Question), but you are evasive about who you're condemning when you write all your Jew-posts.


So let's be specific. The group is Jews. Jewish people. I include here anyone who identifies as Jewish, whether or not they practice Judaism. If your definition is different, then be precise. When you say "the Jewish community" and "Jews do this" and "no Jew does that," do you mean everyone who identifies as Jewish? Do you mean specifically religious Jews, or Zionist Jews, or pro-Israel Jews, or any Jew who does not explicitly condemn other Jews? Am I a Jew because I have Jewish ancestry, even though I have literally zero connection to Jewish culture and religion? Would my Jew blood make me a Jew who does Jewish things? (And is my Jew blood stronger than my Irish blood?) When you bring up things like fraudulent charity programs (I'll accept for the sake of argument that your judgment is correct, though in reality of course I accept nothing you say at face value), how are those "Jewish" schemes that Jews must call out in order to be a considered virtuous? Do you call out every bad thing Christians do and side with people who hate Christians because of it? Even assuming some of these allegedly fraudulent charities are backed by Jewish organizations, is this some behavior that Jews disproportionately engage in, or is charity fraud a pretty widespread phenomenon? (Hint: look into most charities and you'll find a lot of graft and definitely a lot of waste.) This is reminiscent of the Joo-posters who blame pornography on Jews because a lot of pornographers are Jewish-- as if Jews invented pornography, as if consumers of pornography are largely Jews (or wouldn't consume pornography if not for Jews), as if there wouldn't be a pornography industry without Jews. It's all "I hate this group, let's find some examples of members of this group doing bad things -> This group is responsible for all the bad things!"


Your lack of answer is an answer. You hate Jews. You probably carve out some exceptions, like if there is an individual Jew who writes anti-Zionist books and agrees with you "You're right, we Jews are just the worst!" maybe you don't hate him. But by your admission above, you consider Jews as a group to be uniquely perfidious for specious reasons. It's irrational hatred and disingenuously constructed.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


You are hateful and motivated by hate” is the same old anti-Western argument that has been weaponized against Americans for 60 years now




There is no correlation between what I said and what you said. Nothing I said has anything to do with hatred of America, hatred of the West, or hatred of Christians.


Jewish supremacists exist and there is plenty to criticize Israel about.


Nonetheless, I repeat and assert my point: you do not care about Palestinians. You are not motivated by humanitarian concerns for Palestinians. You are not motivated by concerns that Israel's government is not as moral and democratic as it should be. You are motivated by hatred of Jews, which you express in many threads, even threads having nothing to do with Israel or Palestinians. This you have not and will not deny, you will only keep attempting to divert the issue with counter-accusations, such as trying to find some identity politic label to affix onto me that you think will be rhetorically effective. But prove me wrong and state unambiguously that you are not an anti-Semite and you do not hate Jews. I will state unambiguously that you are wrong and I do not hate America, the West, or Christians.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
There's nothing confusing about it. Unlike you, I am not confused about your past statements. You attack Jews regularly. You have made it very clear that you do not like Jews. You do not like the Jewish religion and you do not like the Jewish people. You criticize Israel in an unprincipled manner, by which I mean you criticize Israel in a way that only applies to Israel (unlike leftist critics who criticize Israel because they have a general oppressed/oppressor model, or sometimes a general antipathy for all things Western, with which they associate Israel), because it is by proxy attacking Jews. I'm not going to pretend we're talking about the finer points of rabbinical Judaism or Samaritans or Karaites. Nor am I "upset" about this, any more than I was "upset" about your specious analysis of Orthodox Judaism.


I am calling it out, however, because it's annoying. (I suppose in that sense, "annoyed" is kind of like being "upset"). I am not going to argue about the history because as much as I find the history of the region quite interesting and endlessly convoluted (having read a number of books by Israeli histories, of both the Zionist and New Historian school, by Palestinian historians, largely of the Edward Said school, and by Western historians both from a pro- and anti-Israel perspective), I know when I engage with you, I am not engaging with someone interested in history, in justice, or in discerning truth and nuance, I'm engaging with someone whose core motivation is animus towards Jews, and thus everything you write on the subject is an argument-as-soldier. I can't change your mind, and you're allowed to hate Jews. But I'm not indulging the pretense that this is a discussion about international law or concern for Palestinians.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
So, first of all, I am not Irish. I have some Irish ancestry. I also have English, Scandinavian, German, Jewish, and (according to a DNA test) North African ancestry. As I've said before, I am Jewish enough for the Nazis to have classified me as such in that thing that you say totally didn't happen but was good, but I am not Jewish enough to actually care about Jewish religion or culture or Israel per se. Sorry if that makes it harder to pin me down on my ethnic biases.


Now, the rest of your argument was entirely beside the point because you don't care about the West Bank any more than you care about Gaza. You care about Jews. That is the beginning and the end of it, that is your entire logos on the matter. Your sympathy for Palestinians is an affectation. If a portal to hell opened up and demons invaded Israel, you'd write verbose apologetics for the infernal cause. Absent Jews, obviously you'd be as anti-demon as you are anti-Muslim, but Jews therefore...


I do not believe Iranians or Palestinians are demons, of course. I actually have sympathy for Palestinians and the impossible position they are in, largely because of their leadership (but, it must be pointed out, because of what most of the Palestinian population believes). But to take your straws in order:


The West Bank settlers are awful, I think Israel should put an end to their activities, and other countries should rightfully pressure Israel to do this. That said, even under what passes for "international law," that land basically belongs to whoever can hold it, and "neighboring country encroaches on unincorporated territory and boots out the locals" is a tale as old as time. It's always miserable and tragic, but again, you don't care about the whom, only the who. If Israel did completely pull out of the West Bank and leave the Palestinians there alone, you'd still want Israel to get pushed into the sea by the rest of the Arabs and you'd argue about Gaza and Jordan and Egypt's grievances instead.


The history of Palestine is long and tragic, but it's not directly analogous to England and Ireland, except in the sense that they are inextricably mixed. Israel and Palestine have been mixed since ancient times, and I am no more impressed by Jews' Biblical claims to the land (I don't give a fuck if your holy book says you're rightfully entitled to this land because your ancestors lived here 2000 years ago) than I am by revisionist Palestinian claims that historical Israel never existed and that Palestinians have always had a national identity (they have not) or that Jews haven't been there for centuries.


But again, the historical comparisons are beside the point because I don't believe your "moral intuition" is based on sympathy for Palestinians. it is based on hatred of Jews. Not because this "challenges" us or because you are deeply concerned about the oppressed (in every other context you display nothing but disdain for oppression and social justice narratives). Yes, it's entirely proper to identify your argument as Jew-hatred. If it was anyone but Jews curb-stomping the Palestinians (like, say, the rest of the Arab world, as they have done repeatedly), yes, you'd shrug and say that's what that part of the world is like.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Artificial Programming of Human Needs: A Path to Degradation or a New Impetus for Development?
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I am not approving a manifesto by someone who just showed up for the first time to post this. Participate in the community a while and then maybe we will let you repost Russian academic papers.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Their official stated policy goal is to leave the fate of Israel up to a democratic referendum which includes displaced Palestinians.




This sounds very nice when put in such anodyne, bureaucratic terms. A rhetorical tactic you are very practiced at, phrasing horrendous or risible propositions in superficially reasonable ways.


"Iran just wants democracy and for the Palestinians to be granted suffrage! Who could be against that?"


Gosh, indeed, who could be... if one ignores the undeniable and immediate consequences of letting Palestinians vote on a "democratic referendum on the fate of Israel."


This is just how people who think Israel shouldn't exist say Israel shouldn't exist without saying "Israel shouldn't exist."




Oh the horrors of justice and the rule of law! Is our heart so small and our palate so delicate that we should ignore three million Palestinians in the West Bank living in a dehumanizing and disenfranchised state as Israel’s state-sponsored proxy settlers (some labeled terrorist groups in the US) torture and torment Palestinian women and children nearly every month? I hope not. America should be unironic social justice warriors (not the gay kind).




It's always amusing watching the Jew-haters suddenly become bleeding hearts over Palestinians. You don't care about Palestinians. You wouldn't want them in your country. You don't care about their enfranchisement or dehumanization. You are well aware of the lengthy history of Arabic atrocities carried out against each other, against Iranians, and against Africans. No one has treated the Palestinians worse than other Arabs. In fairness, that's because the Palestinians have had an unfortunate tendency to destabilize every country in which they are admitted. This sucks for the vast majority of Palestinian civilians, who as several people have already pointed out at length, are the unfortunate victims caught up in every war in which a nation undertakes aggression that the women and children and old men never signed up for. But the Israelis aren't refusing a farcical Palestine/Israel one state purely out of ethnic/religious exclusion (though that is certainly part of it). They reject your proposal (again, hilarious to see you pushing a proposal only advocated by the most deluded leftists in the West, only because it's something that would stick in a knife in Jews) because they can see what has happened in every country in which Palestinians become a political force, and because the Palestinians make no secret of what they want to do to Israelis. The idea that admitted as full citizens of Israel, Palestinians would proceed to coexist peacefully with the Jews as fellow citizens is not something anyone actually believes. I don't think even those deluded leftists really believe it, they just won't say out loud that what would result is something they think the Jews have coming.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
War brings out the worst in people. Especially on message boards where no one is actually in danger of dying. But we sure have opinions about who deserves to die and who doesn't.


Dial it down.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Edit: Just fuck off and give me a 6 month - 1 year ban or even permanently instead of this weaksauce bullshit. The below iran thread is seriously reddit and twitter tier on both sides and if this is what the mods think of as good high effort discussion then just do me a favor and show me the door. Otherwise I can't resist responding in kind.




Post-ban editing is usually a permabannable offense, and we are discussing giving you your wish.


We do not control the quality of discourse. You do. We are not going to rearrange the board to accommodate your triggers and kneejerk reflexes. You can resist responding like this. You choose not to. Your emotional incontinence is a You problem.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
You're contradicting yourself and backtracking on every point that you initially used as evidence that America lacks civilization. I will just repeat: America didn't spring out of a vacuum. We had institutional depth from the beginning (albeit many new institutions had to be invented) because even the earliest colonists were not tribes wandering into the New World across the Bering Sea.




I agree that European institutions are under strain too, especially from the hard right and parties like AfD and Reform here in the UK but they're harder, the damage is slower and meeting more resistance at every level.




I sincerely doubt this. Maybe not about Europe resisting right-wing Trump-like movements, but that's not the only kind of change we observe.




Instead what we're seeing over there is that a single administration with a sufficiently bloody minded approach can hollow out norms that were supposedly two and a half centuries deep in what, a year and a half? The US has a proper full constitution and an extremely strong supreme court which could block all this with ease but it has folded like a marzipan deckchair. That's not what deep roots look like. That's what a brilliant structure built on shallow cultural soil looks like when someone finally decides to test the foundations. It sinks at the first real challenge.




Trump is not the first, nor the worst, challenge American norms and institutions have faced. The Civil War was not even the first time the government faced a severe challenge to its credibility and stability (nor was it the last). I have argued with other Motters because I think the probability of Trump actually destroying the Republic is low, but non-zero, and my lowball estimate is higher than they think is realistic. But it's not the first time there has been a non-zero chance of the American experiment ending.


Europe has not exactly been a continuous steady state of reliable governance for the past two and half centuries either.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Maybe they have a great history (I have severe doubts on historical accuracy) but they’re frankly animals that need to be brought up into some sort of abject level of humanity. Even Chinese and China are … people. Iranian people seem to be just swell … but Iran isn’t, and hasn’t been.




"Iranians are animals, not people" is well beyond any defensible steelman. Do not post like this.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


What I mean and what Clemenceau meant (however priggish you may call him) is something closer to what you might call institutional depth and cultural continuity: the slow accumulation of norms, restraints, and social trust that make a society self regulating rather than dependent on raw dynamism (which is something that Americans seem to prize above all else, even when it's the wrong tool for the job, hammer and nail come to mind).




No, that's completely wrong. "Raw dynamism" is a very American cultural myth that Americans like to tell themselves, and it's kind of weird to see you repeating it just because it sounds like an "A-hyuck! A-hyuck!" cowboy stereotype.


America has a great deal of institutional depth and continuity. For all that we fancy ourselves to have reinvented ourselves from whole cloth in 1776, the "American project" very obviously was both something unique and designed, and something that drew on the entirety of English Common Law and Western civilization. The Founding Fathers didn't just pull the Articles of Confederation and then the Constitution out of their asses; they had as much education and "civilization" as their European contemporaries did. That America was something relatively new and different at the time does not mean it was some strange savage MMORPG environment dropped onto North America.


America has institutional norms, restraints, and social trust. Arguably, those are being hollowed out right now. Arguably, so are Europe's. Arguably, a major reason for that is... well. People who do not share those institutional norms, restraints, and social trust.




I'm saying the political culture, the median and especially the current leadership of the country, trends in a direction that makes America an unreliable partner and that Europeans should act accordingly rather than sentimentally.




This may be true, but it's also both an observation very much of the moment (all governments change, and some governments change radically and catastrophically) and has nothing to do with whether or not America is "civilized."




The question on the table is simple: should Europe give America unconditional support in its Iran campaign, or should it use its leverage: basing rights, logistics, diplomatic cover, to extract concessions on Ukraine and tariffs?




Sure, that's a question Europe needs to answer, and I would expect Europe to weight European interests above American interests. But Europe has its own dysfunctions (which is a large part of the reason we're here) and is hardly in a position to be sniffing at Americans and how "unreliable" (or "uncivilized" forsooth) they are.


@Shakes is more interested in the "Europe versus America" question. I don't really care about that. I'm peering at your "civilization" quip and still trying to figure out what the hell you think you mean by it. You haven't described anything America doesn't have, just political decisions America is making that you don't like.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
We very rarely need "containment threads." We're not that large and there isn't that much activity.


If you don't like it, don't read it.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
That's a nice free-form contentless rant, and like Dase I know you love sneering at Westerners, and Americans especially, as hard as we will allow, under the cope of speaking from a delusional sense of superiority. But do tell me: in what sense are Americans not (or ever) "civilized"? Non-rhetorically. Step up. What do those words mean?


Because under every definition with any non-rhetorical meaning, this is simply nonsense. It's a snarky pseudo-elite bon motte with no significance beyond the performative revulsion, the affected contempt.


What you actually mean by "civilized" is "has a culture I like and behaves in ways I approve of." And sure, everyone is entitled to like their own culture and think it is better than other cultures. You can disapprove of America and wish we were more like you all you want. But if you want to start trading cheap sneers about respective cultures and how "civilized" we are and aren't, you sure would not want us to take the mod guardrails off when talking about Pakistan, or Muslim culture writ large.


Whenever I see you toss these haughty sneers like you're an aristocrat curling your upper lip at the revolting peasants, I am just astounded at the sheer arrogance. Not offended, but genuinely astounded that you can be so lacking in perspective and awareness.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I might have let one "Epstein fury" go, but you did not disappoint and doubled down with another unhinged and evidence-free rant about how much you hate Da Joos.


We have a number of people here who hate Jews, and say so regularly. But we've been over this repeatedly. If hating Jews is Your Thing and what you really want to post about and insert into every possible conversation, you have to occasionally post about something else and act like a human being, not an SS-bot. You also need to actually put enough effort into your posts that your grievances have some coherence and sanity, a point, not just "Anything involving Israel is an LGBTQ mass immigration plot because Jooooooooos!"


Most importantly, you have to not be tiresomely, repetitively, and egregiously obnoxious about it. Someone coming in here with some 4chanism like "Epstein fury" is "shitlib"/"magtard"/"5 Guys-tier" low-quality chud discourse that we generally mod on general principal because no one is here for that.


You have been pushing boundaries for a while now. I gave you a break last time, because of your mixed record of shitty posts and (undeserved, IMO) AAQCs. At least one other mod wanted to give you a lengthy ban.


You were told you were getting a break last time and you were told to chill out, and rather than wiping the spittle off your chin, you just could not let go. Such is the nature of unhealthy rage. Since you don't learn, I note that leniency was in fact unwarranted. 30 days ban, and if you come back with more of the same, there won't be any more breaks.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I'm sure Iranians (and everyone else) have said "Death to Pikachu" or "Death to my mother-in-law" at some point.


This argument is disingenuous and seems a lot like the whole "River to the Sea" debate, where whether it's actually an expression of violent intent depends on whether you hate Jews or not. As I already pointed out, not every single person who chants "Death to " literally wants to see an entire country exterminated, but you are well aware that Iranians chanting "Death to " in the streets mean what they say, even if they think it's figurative because they aren't actually in a position to inflict death.


Netanyahu's "Amalek" reference is in fact pretty loaded and I'm sure he knew what he was saying (and that he could waffle on whether he really has genocidal intent). That said, a politician using loaded rhetoric isn't the same as thousands of people chanting something in unison. If thousands of Israelis start chanting "Iran is Amalek," yes, I would assume that the general sentiment is that they would like to see Iran literally wiped off the map and that a not-insignificant fraction of them really and truly want and expect to do that. There are no doubt a non-zero number of Israelis who really mean it literally, and if I were Iranian, I probably would not be very charitable about interpreting an Israeli's use of that word.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Treason would be literally aiding and abetting the enemy, which despite many people's attempts to claim it is so during every conflict, does not include "Speaking out against the war."


Also, you need a declared war for there to be treason.


Taking your point more figuratively, you're just arguing that we should all get on board because Trump made it a fait accompli. But Trump has a short attention span and no conviction. Opponents of the war have every reason to believe he'll TACO if popularity drops. If you believe the war is a bad idea to begin with, 'leaving it half done ' isn't a compelling argument to keep going.