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.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Academic Agent always comes across to me as a meta-grifter whose grift is to claim that everyone else on the right is dumb and/or grifting (see also that skinwalker Hanania). A grifter for hobbits with a slightly higher IQ. Okay, cool story bro. Don't worry, I'll remember to like and subscribe to your Substack so that I can read your exclusive paywalled articles about how everyone else is a money grubbing shill. On what grounds does this guy expect me to take him more seriously than the rest of the online political commentators?
Also @TheOneWhoFarts, do you have an opinion about this article? Your post is just a summary.
Spencer would tell you not to do anything to paint a target on yourself accelerate the collapse by furthering the more insane parts of the left so you can be the reasonable alternative to the communists when the Reichstag burns.
AA would tell you to get cozy with powerful tech executives to form an influential cabal that can influence policy and replace the existing elite with people of your ideology.
Fuentes would tell you to ridicule the left online as hard as possible to capture the youth and dominate the cultural arena as the progressives successfully did.
Regardless of how much of a fake grifter fed these people are, they all have identifiable plans for their political ideology to succeed.
No, Spencer's much-vaunted "liberal turn" is just a misunderstanding of the fact he isn't an accelerationist and doesn't want to see prevailing institutions collapse. He wants to take them over using crypsis and esoteric group-signaling using the same tactics he perceives have been used by Jews.
He wants the institutions to survive, so the next Christian-successor spiritual movement is ready to take the helm and reorient them in the same way they were taken over and reoriented against us.
Is this all the crusader and Shia LaBeouf as Padre Pio memes on Telegram, or something more?
Shia LaBeouf actually literally became a based tradcath under the influence of Mel Gibson. I don’t know whether he still is but last I’d heard he was a regular at St Vitus(FSSP parish in LA).
Yes. I've seen reporting he's being mentored by Mel Gibson. It's a nice redemption story.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Never saw that one coming
There's actually a lot of parallel between Spencer's theory and the e/acc actually, in particular how Culture is a complex interaction between memes and genes. e/acc seems to stop short of (at least exoterically) recognizing this as consequential and vital for Race Formation, whereas that's Spencer's primary concern. For example, how a piece of literary fiction like the Hebrew Bible can mold races of people over thousands of years.
On the other hand, e/acc is correct about the upheaval of AI and Spencer like most of the DR is basically blind to the fact that it is going to change everything.
I would say I think the truth is in between e/acc and Spencer. Spencer + AI Realism, or e/acc + Racial Esoteric Moralization.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link