site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   34886 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.

  • 1 turn signals: no. Mirror and shoulder check are required, though.
  • 2 red lights: fucking yes for motor vehicles, no for bicycles. Driving over a traffic light which just turned red (German humor: "kirschgelb"=cherry yellow) can happen, driving a car past a light which had turned red a while ago is a high crime.
  • 3 speed limits: No. Strictly keeping the speed limits is not required. In Germany, going less than 20km/h over the speed limit will typically result in a small fine, but no risk of your driving license.
  • 4 driving left: Changing lanes is a maneuver with a non-zero risk. If I am overtaking one truck and can see that 200m ahead, I will have to overtake another truck, I will typically stay on the left. If I see that a car behind me wants to go faster and it is 300m, I will typically switch lanes. The fact than a driver who changes lanes aggressively and is willing to not keep appropriate distances between cars can overtake me on the right lane does not mean that owe them a similar behavior so that they can overtake me on the left lane. People who react to a car in front of them going slow by not keeping a safe distance to that car clearly lack the emotional maturity required for a driving license.
  • 5 cutting people off who do not let you in: Only if there is no safer option. If your acceleration strip is ending, and your choices are to cut off a car a bit or slam the brakes to let it pass and then end up with a low speed at the end of the acceleration strip, then make them brake a bit, sure. If the situation is that you are quickly approaching a truck and would have to change lanes to overtake it, just brake.
  • 6 braking rules. No. We are already talking about which traffic rules as written are optional.

Any other possible driving scissor statements?

  • Bikes need to be passed with a limited relative speed and enough clearance. If you can not safely pass a bike, keep driving behind it.
  • The motor of an old car losing a bit of oil is ok.
  • Public roads are not race tracks. Drivers should go to the bathroom before they hit the roads to avoid frequently seen racing under pressure.

Bikers should have the right to use the full lane, but also the obligation to let traffic pass whenever practicable

I remember a state where I lived had a law that on a two lane road having more than X cars following you, while travelling below the speed limit required you to pull off the road and let cars pass. That would be a good principle for bike car road sharing.

Example laws in this vein:

NJ Statutes tit. 39 ch. 4 § 97.1

No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law.

PA Consolidated Statutes tit. 75 ch. 33 § 64

Except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law, no person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic.

Except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law, whenever any person drives a vehicle upon a roadway having width for not more than one lane of traffic in each direction at less than the maximum posted speed and at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, the driver shall, at the first opportunity when and where it is reasonable and safe to do so and after giving appropriate signal, drive completely off the roadway and onto the berm or shoulder of the highway. The driver may return to the roadway after giving appropriate signal only when the movement can be made in safety and so as not to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic.

A pedalcycle may be operated at a safe and reasonable speed appropriate for the pedalcycle. A pedalcycle operator shall use reasonable efforts so as not to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic.

IN Code tit. 9 art. 21 ch. 5 § 7

A person may not drive a motor vehicle at a slow speed that impedes or blocks the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with the law. A person who is driving:

  • on a roadway that has not more than one (1) lane of traffic in each direction; and

  • at a slow speed so that three (3) or more other vehicles are blocked and cannot pass on the left around the vehicle;

shall give right-of-way to the other vehicles by pulling off to the right of the right lane at the earliest reasonable opportunity and allowing the blocked vehicles to pass.

Yeah that last example is exactly what I meant. I dug up the law from where I grew up:

On a two-lane highway where passing is unsafe because of traffic in the opposite direction or other conditions, a slow moving vehicle, behind which five or more vehicles are formed in a line, shall turn off the roadway wherever sufficient area for a safe turn-out exists, in order to permit the vehicles following to proceed. As used in this section a slow moving vehicle is one which is proceeding at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place.

What I like about it is you have to pull over no matter what speed you were going if you get 5 cars following basically anywhere (I read the law as saying someone going 5 over on a road where everyone goes 10 over sti needs to pull over).

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