site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   37594 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 3, 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.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

most of the complaints about Trump in the last 2-3 week boil down to "he did what he said he was going to do"

More I think it's 'he did what he said he was going to do and not only has it turned out to be exactly the disaster everyone predicted it would be it's all about a rounding error of US spending'. If Trump actually cared about excess spending he'd be focused on the three real items of US spending - medicare, medicaid and social security. Everything else is window dressing. This is why the cuts to USAID, NIH etc. are so galling - it's going to do quite a lot of damage all over the appearance of overspending, all totally orthogonal to the real issues behind the deficit.

"the normies" have demonstrated that they are not going to just believe/do whatever they are told

They haven't demonstrated that. All they have demonstrated is that they are going to believe whatever they're told by someone else, but sadly this time someone both more stupid and malicious than anyone involved in the bureaucracy or mainstream media. Twitter is awash with absurd lies about USAID spending which people repeat but it lets them indulge the fantasy that they can meaningfully tackle spending without cutting things they care about or raising taxes. Americans - or at least about half of them - have simply decided they like being told they can have a free lunch.

he would hire Musk to take a chainsaw to the federal budget

What odds would you put on the deficit being lower than it is now when Trump leaves office?

What odds would you put on the deficit being lower than it is now when Trump leaves office?

Lower under what metric?

Under the metric of... the deficit. I don't understand the question.

not only has it turned out to be exactly the disaster everyone predicted it would be it's all about a rounding error of US spending'.

Has it though?

We are only three weeks in, the term is still young. Sure, all the very serious people at Politico are screaming about how terrible and disastrous it is that thier tax-payer funded sinecures are being threatened but why should we as tax-payers care?

This is why the cuts to USAID, NIH etc. are so galling - it's going to do quite a lot of damage

It will not do this. The actually useful parts of USAID are mostly still happening, just under state department purview, and we're better off without the NIH after its many and public lies about covid to push lockdowns.

They haven't demonstrated that. All they have demonstrated is that they are going to believe whatever they're told by someone else, but sadly this time someone both more stupid and malicious than anyone involved in the bureaucracy or mainstream media.

Well sucks for the NIH. Lie constantly to push an agenda, you wind up with declining rates of childhood vaccination. Maybe they should try 'not lying to the public' and see if people trust them then.

The actually useful parts of USAID are mostly still happening, just under state department purview

They are? Do you have a link?

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