site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5mo ago (text post)   35713 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 9, 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.

I now interrupt your regularly scheduled WWIII/Nothing Ever Happens to ask a question:

So, the Bike discussion down below generated a lot of angst and heat, so I'd like to poll The Motte on our driving habits a bit (in the CW thread because I do fear we are going to get some strong feelings).

How do we feel about the following:

  1. You should turn on your turn signal every time you switch lanes or otherwise would be expected to use it, even if nobody is around.

  2. Stop signs and red lights need to be fully stopped at, even if nobody is around and you know there isn't a red light camera.

  3. Speed limits should be followed to the letter when possible.

  4. The left lane is for passing only, and also, if you are in that lane and not passing and someone cuts you off or rides your bumper, that is fine.

  5. If someone does not make room for you and you need to come over (and properly signaled) you can cut them off guilt free.

  6. I can break some of these rules (or others) but other drivers should not.

  7. Any other possible driving scissor statements?

If you'd like to be mad at me: Yes, Yes, No, Yes with qualification, Yes, No.

I don't understand the laws that say that "left lanes on highways are for passing only." So it is just illegal to be in the left lane (since anyone passing in the left lane would be breaking the speed limit laws)? Why have the left lane at all? If you have a fairly busy highway, is everyone supposed to be crowded into only two lanes? Is the idea that once traffic becomes so congested on the middle lanes that the speed is below the limit, then people can move into the left-lane to "pass" at a higher speed? But then are cars supposed to be weaving back into the middle lane after they overtake a car, then back into the left lane to pass, then back into the middle lane, etc, so they are not "cruising" in the left lane? Or is the whole thing just a way of saying, " yeah we know the speed limit is fake and we don't want slow pokes driving the speed limit in the left lane"?

Speed limits are maximums; in theory if someone is going 60km/h in an 80km/h, you are allowed to pass them.

You can also think of it as a common knowledge problem; if everyone knows that they're supposed to be in the left lane if they're fast, and the right lane if they're slow, it can reduce the number of accidents by simply reducing the number of lane changes (if I know I'm 'slow', I'm going to use the left lane to pass extremely slow traffic, but otherwise stay in the right; if someone knows they're 'fast', they're going to stay in the left lane, and use the right lane occasionally to pass slow traffic).

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