site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   25052 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 27, 2025

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.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don’t think George Lucas gets enough credit for writing a pretty realistic government overthrow. The later stuff in the Clone Wars and other tv shows about the troops having mind control chips is annoying and unnecessary, because to an outside observer that’s not privy to the viewer’s secret knowledge, the Jedi really do look like they were pulling shady maneuvers. Look at the facts:

  1. Due to a civil war a formerly quasi-pacifist Buddhist cult is drafted as a military arm of the state, and is now commanding troops in battle.
  2. Despite this militarization, the cult refuses any oversight from the political branches, and is hostile to the idea of the chancellor having anyone on the Jedi council to monitor their decisions. The chancellor and the cult are increasingly at loggerheads.
  3. In the closing days of the war, the cult suddenly decides, on no evidence whatsoever, that the chancellor is a member of an evil witch coven that hasn’t actually existed in 2000 years. They claim that the only reasonable solution is to send six guys to go assassinate the chancellor without trial.
  4. The Chancellor is forced to execute a bloody emergency purge in order to protect the state.

Palpatine actually did a pretty good job tricking the Jedi into looking like they were trying to overthrow the Republic, and I don’t think the rank and file would object to their orders based on what they know.

In the closing days of the war, the cult suddenly decides, on no evidence whatsoever, that the chancellor is a member of an evil witch coven that hasn’t actually existed in 2000 years. They claim that the only reasonable solution is to send six guys to go assassinate the chancellor without trial.

Six Guys? Did I watch a different movie than you?

The Jedi were never pacificists, were they? They were always magical special forces but had been used to being used as swat.

They weren’t, but they primarily operated as diplomats before the civil war, and having them as full blown combatants and military officers was seen as somewhat weird and uncomfortable.

They were wizard cops. Having Jedi do actual combat was pretty common from what we know of them.

The chips became narrative necessary in the Clone Wars TV show because the Clones and Jedi developed such a trust from working together that, in the above scenario, the clones would have sided with the Jedi over the political leaders. The clones also had evidence that the "evil witch coven" was alive and active, they saw Count Dooku slaughter many clones, fought Ventress, etc.

Absent all that development, it makes sense without the chips.

But the clones had no reason to believe that chancellor palpatine was part of the witch coven. As far as they knew, the witch coven was defeated and the Jedi immediately attempted to overthrow the republic by declaring the chancellor to be a surviving member.

Cody, specifically, became a problem. Cody doesn't seem like the person who would shoot Obi Wan in the back. Cody could rightfully assume that Obi Wan would be one of the good ones. He just took down Grevious in front of him! Sure, some Jedi were evil, that had been demonstrated elsewhere in the Clone Wars. But not Obi Wan.

They had the choice to give Cody an arc where he started distrusting Obi Wan, or they could do the chip thing instead. They chose the chip thing.

My headcanon is that clones tried a lot less hard to kill popular jedi commanders, and that 'yeah, he must've been dead' was because of that.

Point of clarity: When Windu and the Dying Squad of Jedi arrived, they went to arrest the chancellor, not assassinate him. Thus the "I AM the senate" line, and Windu's "Not yet" (bzzzzzzzzwang ignition of lightsaber).

It was Yoda who went in with the intention of actually offing Sidious, who by then had been proven a sith lord.

Unless you're typing out the news as reported by the legacy Coruscant media, in which case yes, the masses can be tricked.

When Anikin and Mace Windu are arguing in front of the window, Mace specifically says that Palpatine is too dangerous to be left alive and that his corruption of the courts makes the justice system inadequate to deal with him. He’s definitely arguing for an impromptu extra-judicial killing right there in the office.

The Jedi are justified if you know everything that’s going on, but from a public perspective it’s all very suspicious looking.

I mean to be clear, the Jedi really do act like pompous jackasses. They happen to be correct, but they have plenty of bad press from being douchebags.

True. But this is after the initial confrontation, where Sidious has murdered at least two jedi and shown clearly his darkside self. Yes from a public/filtered perspective it's dubious.

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