site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   34502 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 16, 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.

4
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Due to a brief alignment of opinions and goals certain parts of Twitter managed to convince themselves that they had real power and influence over the president and the wider right, and now they feel BETRAYED when the wider right tells them no you're just a stopped clock that happened to be correct.

Hanania doesn't even have the benefit of being a stopped clock. He's confused and going backwards. The people who he's now decided are a threat, the so called "woke right" are not university professors, presidents, congressmen, CEOs, etc. They are frogs and eggs on X and the occasional podcast host. He's trying to re-calibrate against a basically non-existent enemy, which, even if it was to turn into a threat, would have to build steam for 30 years to get to where the woke left CURRENTLY still is with regards to power.

Good points. In a further twist of irony Hanania himself seems to be more closely aligned with those "frogs and eggs on X" then anyone else and is trying to court the Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney, and David Brooks wing of "soft Republicans" as though they're still in charge of the party.

As @AlexanderTurok says below Hanania has completely failed to update his priors based on the changing situation.

as though they're still in charge of the party

Many are still in high positions in the party, you just don't hear about it.

...because (unlike Hanania) they are savvy enough to notice which way the wind is blowing and keep thier heads down.

It seems like many Rightists got used to being out of power and haven't psychologically accepted that Trump's election is something that happened.

Trump, Johnson, and Thune are not closely aligned with the "woke right". Harris, Schumer, and Pelosi are closely aligned with the woke left.

and now they feel BETRAYED

Which is extremely low-T behavior and should be seen as embarrassing on the part of all involved. The best and most masculine, high-agency response is to continue taking power at the fastest rate possible and then take revenge once power is achieved.

Not to whine about it on the Internet and “take revenge” by willingly sacrificing all gains made so far.

Sad to see genuine reactionary potential throwing itself away. Many such cases, I guess.

I'm skeptical that he was ever genuine.

Funnily enough, I think I misunderstood and thought you were talking about the Loomerite-Tuckerist wars going on in the right at the moment, as various factions spar for influence by threatening to take their rubber ducky and go home.

Hanania is definitely some kind of weird op effort, you’re right about that. He is also not the elite human capital he likes to see himself as.

I misunderstood and thought you were talking about the Loomerite-Tuckerist wars going on in the right at the moment.

Oh, it's that too. It's all that.

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