site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2mo ago (text post)   28361 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 11, 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.

Either you yourself are Travis LeBlanc, or you have simply lifted substantial portions of this essay without crediting the author.

Yes, this is par for the course for this particular troll.

Right, I just wanted to have that formally documented for the mods to see. @cjet79 and others, if you were reconsidering the permaban, hopefully this might be useful.

Definitely not reconsidering now, thanks for pointing that out.

Too similar to a previously banned user. Multiple top level posts, very little response. You aren't here for discussion. Permaban for now. One of the other mods might over-rule this.

Edit: post appears to have been plagiarized anyways. Ban is staying permanent.

I'm certainly not inclined to. I'm surprised it made it through the new user filter in the first place, but I suppose it could have been allowed just so the banhammer was dropped in public.

Eh. Antisemitism is spreading faster than knowledge of polygenic scores, haplogroups, or high East Asian IQ, but it's more accurate IMO to say that base-level anti-nonwhite sentiment / white nationalism is spreading faster than sophisticated 'HBD'. Openly antisemitic tweets sometimes get tens of thousands of likes. But looking at this account, which very frequently gets 20k likes and sometimes more, the focus is mostly on black people and immigrants. I wouldn't really call that antisemitism having more potency than HBD, just different variants of things spreading among smarter people and more normal people. "Black people do crime a lot and are kinda dumb" is definitely the closest thing to HBD that'll get 50k likes. Musk often interacts with the iamyesyouareno account. (glancing at his likes, musk also just liked a BAP tweet, lol, as usual the tweet's vaguely something one might agree with but literally completely wrong)

Antisemitism seems to have less potency among even what passes for 'elites' on far-right twitter recently - they'll signal towards it in an edgy way but not really endorse it - reasons I've seen from people like that are: because most smart people are very socially integrated with jews at this point, because so many influential people in the scene are part or wholly jewish, because 'wignat antisemitism', when looked at objectively, seems kinda cringe and stupid, especially if you're someone who was all in on it as a teenager, and because it doesn't seem to have a path to power anyway. And among "elites" who are clearly influenced by the far-right sphere of ideas but are nevertheless more serious and less anonymous, antisemitism has very little purchase compared to HBD.

The Jewish RW e-celebs (BAP, russiancosmist, FbF, etc.) also tend to go in the hardest on the hardcore hatred of blacks and browns, presumably to take a little heat off of themselves since they know a huge portion of their audience is Jew-hating wignats.

I don't think that's their reasoning. Mostly they're reacting to the Nick Fuentes strain of antisemitism which is essentially third-worldist at its core, lamenting supposed Jewish predations against hapless black and brown people, who in the Fuentes-verse imagining are just trying to live in peace, and who would surely never be coming to the West in such large numbers were it not for the wars instigated by global Jewry.

I think it’s both, one can’t deny that they’re obviously less drawn to antisemitism for transparent personal reasons, but they also correctly point out how flawed the thirdworldist “enemy of my enemy” arguments are in a way that many gentile reactionary commentators also do. It’s hard to know what Fuentes believes, he started off parroting /pol/ as a teenager, I don’t think he had time to develop ideologically before he established his particular grift, so he’s mostly just following his audience.

BAP is a mischling, the rest are making fun out of you for being 'antisemitism first' type. (pun on Ameríca First, the Fuentes organisation)

You’re sure Martin isn’t? Interesting.

I remember the moment. Basically everyone mildly thoughtful declared they're Jewish too, some Fuentards fell for it and didn't get the joke.

I don't follow any of them closely enough to know, but the only times I remember those martin, 2cb, etc claiming to be jewish it seemed obviously ironic / a way to 'own' the wignats, so idk

Well BAP at least is (23&Me results and everything), Martin tends to get really defensive around the Jews/Israel but yeah RW twitter is generally just a huge welter of "you're jewish" accusations and counteraccusations so I'm not 100%. My favorite is the absolute refusal of a large number of users to accept that self-declared mass immigration advocate and Klaus Schwab enjoyer Richard Hanania could possibly be a gentile.

Hanania’s a gentile but he’s also Palestinian so most wignats would consider him nonwhite or an edge-case at best. I think Martin is Jewish since he talks about it all the time. 2CB or fbf could be trolling, I doubt it though since they all seem to be at least loosely zionist and very much anti-Hamas in a way most gentile wignats aren’t.

Martin isn't Jewish if your standard of evidence is posting images of 23andme results not sourced from Google images (he's NW European, mostly English iirc). He's also talked about his Christian background on spaces.

Like most posters in BAP's clique, he's critical of "third-worldist" anti-Zionism and lowbrow antisemitism in general.

FBF is trolling (he’s Croatian) but 2CB is a maybe…

On the other hand as my friend said the other day “Oh a guy at a far right event at [Redacted RW event space in Manhattan] - of course he’s Jewish”!

Well BAP at least is (23&Me results and everything),

Not at all saying this happened, but I were BAP I'd absolutely fake a test showing I was jewish and post it. You can just lie on the internet!

True, but in BAP’s case The Atlantic tracked down his family when they doxxed him and essentially said (without directly declaring) that they were Jewish.

I think that’s probably true. Second City Bureaucrat is Jewish too, aren’t they?

I think so, but Groypers call everybody who disagrees with them Jewish, so it's kind of hard to tell sometimes.

Yes, I mean self-declared, as the others on your list are. That alone is a not insubstantial portion of the top influencers in that space, though of course that was always the case.

Well, the Jewish victimhood-industrial complex was never long-term sustainable. It’s too obvious of a lie. Black Lives Matter at least had some portion of the outcomes to back up their claims, incorrect though they may be.

Add to that that the Jewish victimhood-industrial complex just kept turning on its most reliable backers for no apparent reason. Con inc got attacked by Jewish victimhood merchants probably 1000 times before returning fire.

As for why now, well, I think it just had to percolate up after Kanye and that basketball player got the ideas into popular discussion. People took a look around, noticed that jews are not being victimized by society, they’re not about to be, they have their own country, and the Holocaust happened 80 years ago. As a general rule, people don’t want to perpetually grovel over things that happened to your grandparents.

Edit: In a more succinct version of my previous post.

The idea that Jewish faults are not up to debate and non Jewish faults at expense of Jews can be overly focused upon without restraint, is absurd and is understandable why people will increasingly reject this. It is also understandable to see people react against this when such agendas relate to Noel Ignatiev type narratives and come along with increased authoritarianism.

As a movement with such ideology has itself become more influential naturally you see rising opposition. The reality is that the racism, sexism, antisemitism narratives label moderate positions as racist, promote a wildly one sided view, and the groups they favor are definitely not oppressed. Just as feminism by how it clasifies misogyny, is misandrist, same applies to the antisemitic narrative. The Jews who have been themselves very important to a Jewish supremacist movement of course are going to catch more criticism. Especially the powerful Jewish NGOs like the ADL.

Ideally, the progressive framework of sacred cows should be supplanted, with a framework of favoring more balanced, even handed treatment of different identity groups which would include both negative criticisms and and positive observations. A good way to do that would be growing intolerance towards the movement that weaponizes history to promote the wildly one sided narratives. Whether it is done by distorting reality, or by cherry picking events including attrocities and hiding inconvenient ones.

Rather than letting people like Jonathan Greenblat win by getting intimidated by words like slavery, holocaust, racism, antisemitism, we should instead see people ridicule such attempts and reject them. There is nothing inconsistent to thinking for example that the practice of slavery is abhorrent but also having no patience for those using the narrative of slavery to vilify and harm southerners, or Europeans.

Antagonistic, don't do this.

This is a "why do you beat your wife" question. I have never used AI to write, or edit a post, so I have can't see how they read like it, or why.

I doubt that an AI would even succeed in writing something so politically incorrect. In fact their prompts tend to be making excuses not to address issues, and they sound more like the rhetoric one sees by the liberal side. I usually edit in real time to fix some grammatical mistakes and change parts of it. Seems like a convenient way to attack and distract with low effort so I would just ignore it except I address it just so it isn't used as an excuse for mod action.

Do you have anything of value to say about the actual issue?

the JQ is more complicated. One has to understand both Jews as an ethnocentric group as well as the psychology of the individual Jew. You also have to know their history and how they got to where they are today. It requires big-picture thinking. There are a lot of moving parts to the JQ, and it can be tricky to wrap your head around how all the pieces fit together.

“To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand the Jew…”

I welcome your return to the subreddit but think that you are likely to fall to the earth and get banned again for baitposting so incessantly on your first day back. It’s not that I dislike your prompts, they’re always interesting and usually relevant, but I think participating a little more each time before posting multiple top-level posts in quick succession would help you avoid the mods next time you return.

An oft-banned user who enjoying posting provocative posts, heavily reliant on quoted content, designed primarily as bait.

I don’t think the vast majority of Jews act with or have any substantial ‘anti-white’ animus; otherwise intermarriage rates with gentile whites wouldn’t be well over 50%.

I think Jews embraced liberal ideas with great zealotry on account of perceived and real prejudice toward them in many traditional European societies. This affinity for liberalism continues today.

But liberalism was invented by white gentiles, and through much of the last 200 years the majority of its destructive impact on aspects of Western societies has been imagined, implemented and supported by gentile whites, and that includes things like mass immigration to the US, championed by gentiles like Phil Hart, Ted Kennedy and so on as well as by some Jewish activists, and the sexual revolution, whose clear champion was one Hugh Hefner.

But disproportionately buying into the ideals of their host society is not a crime, and the most Jews can be accused of (as a group, I mean) is for believing too hard in the principles of the gentiles who themselves adopted the ideas of equality, universality and democracy that their own people created.

The modernity you decry is a predominantly gentile project in which Jews played a substantial-but-supporting role, in part because the goys really seemed to know what they were doing. Nobody deserves to hang for that, although it is true some people have a curious inability to look inward for the cause of their people’s misfortune instead of blaming everyone else; we’ve all been there.

HBD is completely out of mainstream conception and there are nearly no analogous arguments within mainstream discourse.

However Jews being exempted from privilege discourse was already a strange turn of events; considering all the railing against ethnostates and over-representation of groups it was exceedingly strange that they NEVER caught any flack as a result of that rhetoric. All that seems to have changed is that the magic barrier protecting them from this rhetoric appears to have fallen. Not for any logically consistent reason, mind you, simply because they made an enemy of some brown folk, who will always trump whites and white-adjacent types in the progressive hierarchy. But it is therefore easier for people who apply existing rhetoric to a "new" group than it is to accept wholly divergent facts and explanations from what they've already been told as would be necessary to accept HBD.

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