site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5mo ago (text post)   33709 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 14, 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.

6
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

AP and Reuters reports about today's developments:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-meet-with-el-salvadors-president-amid-questions-over-deportations-2025-04-14/

https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-white-house-el-salvador-kilmar-abrego-garcia-ad338d6b4558a6aba80e8290fd3eece9

If Trump backs down, I wonder if ICE's fuckup will have ironically created the conditions for Garcia to make a valid an asylum claim in the US: Legitimate fear of persecution in your home country and the US being the first safe country you enter, following that threat. Bukele eliminated defendant's rights and personally called Garcia a terrorist:

“The question is preposterous. How can I smuggle a terrorist into the United States?” Bukele, seated alongside Trump, told reporters in the Oval Office Monday. “I don’t have the power to return him to the United States.”

Also, ???

Bondi asserted that two immigration court judges — who are under Justice Department purview — found that Abrego Garcia was a member of MS-13, although the man’s attorneys say the government has provided no evidence that he was affiliated with MS-13 or any other gang. The allegation is based on a confidential informant’s claim in 2019 that Abrego Garcia was a member of a chapter in New York, where he has never lived.

If Trump backs down, I wonder if ICE's fuckup will have ironically created the conditions for Garcia to make a valid an asylum claim in the US

If the US, by claiming he is a gang member, has caused El Salvador to persecute him, I would say they have indeed provided the basis for a valid asylum claim. I am not sure if this is true if he actually is a gang member, but given that the two pieces of evidence are a confidential informant and Chicago Bulls themed clothing (which the US claims is characteristic of both TdA AND MS-13... aren't gangs supposed to use DIFFERENT "colors"), I don't think that's been shown to any reasonable standard of evidence.

Yes, this is just Trump having made a deal with El Salvador about paying them to imprison gang members for him, and some underling having to find some "gang members" to deport in a hurry. "Oh, that guy was accused of being a gang member by someone without any credibility? Whatever, it will have to do."

I wonder how long it will take for the real gang members (if there are any being deported) to wisen up to the fact that murdering an ICE agent (or just a random civilian bystander) will immensely improve their outcomes (if they survive the encounter). Then they get a nice long trial in the US. Spending 20 years on Uncle Sam's death row before being fried likely has a much better QALY balance than spending the rest of your life in some El Salvador megaprison.

(This might also explain the selection. "This guy is suspected to run the local MS-13 chapter. He is investigated for three gang shootings, rape and drug trafficking. Should we round him up?" -- "Nah, that one might go out fighting, and I am not getting paid enough to take bullets. Uhm, I mean we might need him as a witness for gang-related crime later. Look, that one is accused of having a five-year-old kid with his American wife, and also wearing some clothing reminiscent of gang colors. He is probably not even packing and will never believe that we will haul his ass to some El Salvador prison complex before we have him cuffed.")

I wonder how long it will take for the real gang members (if there are any being deported) to wisen up to the fact that murdering an ICE agent (or just a random civilian bystander) will immensely improve their outcomes (if they survive the encounter). Then they get a nice long trial in the US.

Why? Is there something that would prevent the U.S. from deporting immediately and letting El Salvador prosecute the case?

6th Amendment:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Obviously the 6th Amendment does not apply if the government is not prosecuting them, and a deportation proceeding is not a criminal trial. Foreign nationals being tried by foreign courts have no 6th Amendment case with the U. S. Government.

I wonder how long it will take for the real gang members (if there are any being deported) to wisen up to the fact that murdering an ICE agent (or just a random civilian bystander) will immensely improve their outcomes (if they survive the encounter). Then they get a nice long trial in the US.

Why? Is there something that would prevent the U.S. from deporting immediately and letting El Salvador prosecute the case?

The US government could deport an illegal immigrant without indicting them for crimes they are suspected to have committed while in the USA, but your question was if there is "something that would prevent the U.S. from deporting immediately and letting El Salvador prosecute the case" and the 6th Amendment is that thing.

Crimes committed abroad are often prosecuted domestically, murder is illegal in El Salvador so he can be deported and then tried there.

How often do you think? My understanding was that extraterritorial jurisdiction was exceptional, especially if the conduct could be prosecuted in the territorial jurisdiction it occurred.

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