site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4mo ago (text post)   35483 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 don't mind the skilled aggro drivers.

I was talking more about the common cultural practice (which I understood to be in LA, but I guess NJ too) of deliberately stopping people from changing lanes if you see them signalling.

It seems less about aggressive/defensive driving, and more about a weird adversarial relationship with other drivers predicated on the belief they'd do the same to you.

Everyone on the road should be allies in keeping the traffic moving. You (I think? I just woke up from a nap) are describing oblivious idiots who are neither ally nor enemy, just in it for themselves. I'm talking about the explicitly adversarial dynamic that seems to exist in those places where everyone just makes everything worse for everyone else on purpose.

Oh you reckon they're just selfish? I assume anyone who doesn't drive like me is my enemy. I was using other examples to show its a bigger problem than just a guy being a dick and not letting you in, I considered them of a kind. But it's true I haven't experienced it in LA or NJ - there are only three states I'm willing to drive in in the US - Idaho, Tennessee and Texas. I would probably drive in Utah too, but that would mean going to Utah.

Texas.

Ah, you enjoy breaking the speed limit while the other drivers pass you constantly.

Personally I find drivers with aggressive agency to be incredibly rare.

I find most people are incredibly unaware of their surroundings. I've started to pay close attention to the delay between the light turning green and people going (or the car in front of them moving and them going), so many people's reaction time is measured in actual seconds.

I'd posit most of the times I'm cut off it's not a deliberate choice to shark me, they just didn't look at their mirrors or blind spot. We also have a ridiculous # of uber drivers from India who I shall politely say drive with less conscientiousness than is perhaps ideal.

I'm Canadian but I was actually just in Texas and I was driving there. It was quite fine, people were normal and orderly.

I hope to never drive in a place where someone signalling to change lanes is an challenge to do everything in you can to prevent them entering though. I really cannot emphasize enough how much of a lose/lose that culture is. Take that shit to the third world.

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