site banner
ZorbaTHut  1yr ago (text post)   44937 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 5, 2022

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.

105
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Keystone Clown Contest Part 2: Ischemic Boogaloo

See here for the last discussion of the Hoodie Ogre vs the Huckster Healer.

In Our Last Exciting Episode...

Mehmet Oz, in an effort to look like a real person, went to a grocery store and was caught on camera complaining about the price of crudités, which is apparently New Jerseyan (or maybe Ottoman) for "uncooked vegetable platter, maybe with dip". So Fetterman did the obvious thing and ran ads and had a fundraiser about how obviously elitest and out of touch it is to use (forgive me) Fr*nch words for common things.

Fetterman’s campaign said it had raised more than half a million dollars off the viral video within a day, including more than $65,000 from a sticker that has the phrase “Wegners: Let them eat Crudite” on it.

Oz's people clapped back with this banger

“If John Fetterman had ever eaten a vegetable in his life, then maybe he wouldn’t have had a major stroke and wouldn’t be in the position of having to lie about it constantly,”

(Speaking as a man who once spent three weeks on the "all cheesesteak diet" and learned a painful lesson thereby, eat your vegetables.)

Again, Fetterman's people did the obvious thing and harshly criticized Oz for this failure of decorum. Many variations on "Imagine your doctor making fun of you."

So, the next point of contention to come up is the debates. Team Fetterman initially tried to use the mockery about his stroke as a reason to dodge out on them altogether,, to which Team Oz published this vicious list of concessions

Doctor Oz promises not to intentionally hurt John’s feelings at any point.

We will all allow John to have all of his notes in front of him along with any earpiece so he can have the answers given to him by his staff in real time.

At any point, John Fetterman can raise his hand and say “bathroom break!”

If the topic of his pardoned murderers comes up, we will allow extra rime for him to explain that second-degree murder is “not as bad as first-degree murder.

We will pay for any additional medical personnel he might need to have on standby.

(Incidentally, "lying liberal Fetterman" is a terrible mocking nickname. I never thought I'd long for the days of Shady Katie McGinty. I wish I could find one of the ads that really hammed up the nickname, but they don't seem to be on Youtube.)

Team Fetterman is obviously outraged.

Ok, more serious face on.

As of now, the first debate was supposed to have been on Sept 6th, and didn't happen. Fetterman has committed to one debate, but not until mid-late October, which will be weeks after early voting starts. Team Fetterman has been flipping stories about his health issues, from downplaying it, to "almost died", and now it's purportedly some minor auditory processing issues. Some people covering him have expressed concerns, including the Pittsburg Post-Gazette. Fetterman has only had some brief interactions with the public or reporters since his stroke in May, heavily supervised. The ads he's been bombarding the Philly market with are supposedly made with pre-stroke recordings. His current speaking is.... not great. This issue, and Oz campaign ads hammering Fetterman on his progressive crime policies may be working to Oz's favor, as Fetterman's lead seems to be more like 4-5%, down from 11% a month ago.

But at least he's got the Snookie vote.

second-degree murder is “not as bad as first-degree murder."

That's why they're different charges!

If second-degree murder is equally bad as first-degree murder, then you'd just charge them as murder.

I still cannot believe that Trump picked Oz. Well, I suppose I can believe it very easily, given that the decision process seems to have mostly been, "I saw that guy on TV and he says nice things about me now", but it remains an unbelievably bad choice. I personally have no problem with mocking Fetterman's obesity, sloth, and the resultant health issues from his obesity and sloth, but it's just incredibly obvious that this is a poor political choice when you're running for office in a nation that consists primarily of fat, slothful people with poor health. Everything from Oz's ridiculous media persona to his divided loyalties makes him an atrocious candidate.

That said, Fetterman is somehow worse. As I said back over on the other place:

One thing I don't really see people talking about with Fetterman is that he has spent almost his entire life being a loser, a complete layabout, and a privileged waste of resources. Despite his blue-collar look, he's pretty well never had a real job, spent a huge amount of time and money getting graduate degrees that he had no real plan for, and living off his parents. As recently as 2015 he had almost no personal income and received over $50K in cash from his parents. His house was purchased from his sister for a dollar.

Taken in that context, the whole "I wear a hoodie and have tattoos" thing comes off less like being a hardworking everyman and much more like being the kind of failson trash that most people have contempt for. Seriously, guy was in his 40s, living off his parents, when he finally found a way to make money off politics.

I don't really understand how people can hear his life history and not write him off as a grifter that should be sent packing. Say what I will about Mehmet Oz and his grifting, at least he did have an actual profession that he apparently took seriously and excelled at. You don't become a hospital's chief of thoracic surgery by living life the way Fetterman has.

So we've got a slovenly, stroked out loser running against an elitist Turkish snake oil salesman. I intend to use this as an example any time someone suggests to me that democracy is particularly effective at choosing good leadership. I do expect any sharp interlocutor to retort that the people get what they deserve in their politicians.

he's clearly not healthy enough for the job, but if he was to win and drop dead it would not be that big of a deal anyway. this is not the POTUS

If nothing prevented Strom Thurmond from being elected to the US Senate at the age of 93, there's nothing particular (apart from the will of the voters, of course) preventing Fetterman on any health concerns, either.

I don't think anyone is saying otherwise. The lack of a legal barrier to Fetterman running doesn't mean it's not a legitimate voting consideration though. Unless you are making a stronger argument that it is wrong to even bring up a person's age or health in a political race.

I was already typing this out, so I figure I'll add it to the thread on PA elections to avoid being repetitive.

Two Faces of Trumpism: PA Statewide Elections Predict the Future of the GOP

TLDR: Trump as a political phenomenon in America can't be understood from only one angle. He didn't win by being this, or that, or the other thing; he won by getting some people to believe he was this, some to believe he was that, and some to believe he was the other thing. Two Trump proteges running in statewide races in PA this Fall give us a bellwether as to which of two versions of Trumpian politics will be successful going forward: Dr. Oz is the flip-flopping celebrity dillettante with no political experience and vague ideas as to why he ought to be in charge, Doug Mastriano is the hardened veteran culture warrior tough guy with frighteningly specific plans about what he'll do in office.

In the 2022 midterms there are two major elections in Pennsylvania, one for senator (seat vacated by Pat Toomey, pour one out for my former bar owner homie) and one for Governor (Wolf is term limited out). Pennsylvania has been arguably the swing state for two presidential elections. It's earning its nickname of the Keystone state, and its electoral map is a microcosm of the country with Blue islands on the East and West and Red up the middle. Pennsylvania is the best state to watch to see what the future politics of America will look like, and these elections are the best way to see how it is playing out.

After heavily contested primaries, both the GOP Senate and Gubernatorial nominations went to the candidate endorsed by Donald Trump. As far as I recall, every primary candidate tried to claim the banner of MAGA, all of them claimed to be ready to fight "the woke mob" and the liberal agenda. No squishy moderates here. In the end, the winners were the candidates Trump directly endorsed, not the upgrade Mitt Romney or barnyard Candace Owens. It's Trump's party now. But the two candidates represent divergent visions of Trumpism. Dr. Oz is a lightweight, a celebrity huckster with no political experience, who is either a non-devout Muslim or in a cult run by his in-laws, with no strong political opinions that can be traced back more than a year, long time ties to popular Democratic politicians and liberal causes, and no roots in Pennsylvania to speak of. Doug Mastriano is the opposite, a former Army Colonel and War College instructor, with years under his belt in Republican politics, a devout Christian and Nationalist (and maybe Christian Nationalist) who has recently decided to stop cooperating with subpoenas from the January 6th Committee. To put it in internet: Oz would fit right in on Instagram, Mastriano would fit right in on /r/themotte. Among Republicans in PA, I've run into a lot who they like one but not the other. Either "Oz doesn't seem that bad, and he must be smart to be a heart surgeon, and Fetterman's a bit whackadoodle...but Mastriano, his soundbites are so bad..." or "I can respect Mastriano, he has balls, but Oz is a fake."

And in 2016, I remember hearing both those things said about Trump by different people. He excited a lot of far-right sentiment that was sort of dormant prior, bringing out Evangelicals who were ready to wage the culture war in the open, and nationalists who were ready to build the wall; while at the same time he benefitted from being viewed as a moderate by a lot of people who knew him from TV. That was what put him over the top, and it will be interesting to see which version of this strategy is successful going forward.

Mastriano Wiki ; Theme music Highlights: Mastriano wants to cut state funding to public schools to the bone, with local reporting showing that staffing at local high schools would fall by 40-65%; Mastriano has stated that as Governor he would have the power to declare a Presidential election vote void in 2024; Mastriano is hilariously direct on Gay Marriage and abortion, wanting both illegal in every single case no exceptions no way no how; Mastriano was definitely at the Jan 6th rally, but probably didn't storm the capitol, although if he had he wouldn't have left a trace as the dude was literally a war college instructor on intelligence operations. People who like him like that Mastriano is a full bird culture warrior, his campaign slogans are mostly biblical references and his yard signs feature bible verses. His campaign also has some surprisingly funny spots given that I've never seen Mastriano so much as smile. I trust Mastriano to be exactly who he says he is, to the greatest extent he possibly can be within the system as it exists. He's running against Josh Shapiro, and I'm convinced that Shapiro keeps centering his devout Judaism in advertisements hoping he can bait Dougie boy into saying something vaguely anti-semitic.

Dr. Oz wiki ; Theme Music Highlights: Oz was a well respected heart surgeon before getting on Oprah, marrying into a family of cult leaders and becoming a full-time huckster and quack; he's taken liberal positions publicly in writing on topics like Abortion (says he saw how bad outlawing it was before Roe), Guns (wrote an op-ed favoring a federal assault weapons ban, and has argued in favor of Red Flag laws, a red line for me); he has never lived in Pennsylvania though he has lived near it his whole life, his listed address when he filed to run was his in-laws house, meaning that if he voted in the 2020 election in PA his vote was almost certainly fraudulent; in addition to still living in New Jersey he's still a citizen of Turkey, which I wish he would center as a positive ("Turkey has been an ally of the USA for 70 years, acting as a pillar of the free world against Communism and Islamic Extremism, and my dual citizenship will help us build ties with this key ally."). People who like Oz basically think he's more moderate than he's letting on, that he must be a smart guy because surgeon, and that he'll figure it out once he's in office. He's running against the guy they'd cast as Gritty if they made a live action adult themed mascot film.

So which Trumpism will succeed to the banner? Keeping in mind that PA is the swing state of swing states, Oz can never run for president without an amendment to the constitution, but it's quite likely that any of the other three candidates could be presidential/VP short-list contenders within the next decade if they become Governor/Senator. If Both win, then we're probably seeing a Red Wave, and Trump 2024 is a near certainty, because voters are embracing both the Christian Nationalist and Quack Celebrity Pseudo-Moderate strains. If Mastriano teaches Shapiro how to Dougie, but Oz quacks out against Fetterman, then it would seem that Trumpism has left behind the cable-tv popularity contests in favor of raw rightist culture warring, and if an anti-abortion extremist can win in PA then there may be hope for the pro-life movement nationally. If Oz beats up a stroke victim, but Mastriano loses to a Jewish government lawyer, then it would seem to indicate that Trumpian candidates are better off triangulating towards vague moderation than fighting for pure culture war idealism. If both lose, then the lesson would seem to be that only Trump is Trump, and other Republicans would do better not to try to follow him too closely.

Leaving aside, of course, the possibilities that for example people start really looking at what Swedenborgians do, or that Mastriano finally makes a Jew comment, or that Shapiro turns out to idk diddle kids or something, or that Fetterman literally dies. That's the problem with elections, there are too few of them and they're all unique, individual events can ruin the predictions.

Now I wish I'd delayed until morning; this was a much better write-up. It's interesting to see the difference in ad spending in different markets. I don't think I have seen a single pro-Mastriano or pro-Shapiro ad, just a few attack ads on Mastriano. Comparatively, Fetterman and Oz are both running tons of ads. Oz has a mix of positive and negatives, highlighting his medical experience in the former, and Fetterman's "weak on crime" policies in the latter. The affiliated PAC ads run hard on "CRAZY LEFTIST JOHN FETTERMAN", which makes me think someone saw the same thing I did in regards to John playing coy games with his party and positions. Fetterman's ads are mostly negative, going hard and explicit on the Othering - one of the common ones literally uses the phrase "He's not one of us." If the parties were flipped, we'd be having a national conversation about how Fetterman is an open white supremacist - but the accusation still has plenty of truth to it.

Edit: Speak of the devil, just saw a new Fetterman ad portraying him as tough on crime, brief pause in gun deaths in Braddock, yadda yadda. I guess the attack ads were having an effect. The new ad has a much more "PA accent" than any of the others I've seen, FWIW.

Incidentally, "lying liberal Fetterman" is a terrible mocking nickname

How could they ignore the obvious choice of "Fibbing Fetterman"?

Fibbing, Feckless, Factious, Fake, Febrile, Feeble, Fickle, Furtive Fetterman.

There are literally a dozen better options than "Lying Liberal."

Alliteration is key.

Given the focus on his "soft on crime" stances and spotty work history, I would have gone with Feckless Fetterman.

I think it was mentioned previously that his ads weren't explicit about being a Democrat, so maybe that is Oz's attempt at making people realize the guy's a lib.

Fibbing Fat Fetterman the Faker.

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