site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2mo ago (text post)   42372 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 8, 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.

9
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don't see any evidence other than the timing that the cheering was connected with Kirk's death. However, if it was, that wouldn't surprise me one bit. Plenty of people on both sides of the culture war feel happy when members of the other side die.

I know that you would almost certainly not publicize a video of right-wingers cheering the death of some leftist figure, so I take your comment as being tribalism rather than as an attempt to shed light on things.

I know that you would almost certainly not publicize a video of right-wingers cheering the death of some leftist figure,

Forecasting future behavior of a fellow internet rando is now ... evidence?

@WhiningCoil is definitely dancing with the mod tiger these past few days, but his post of the TMZ video is more than a bare-link and it is important and topical --- half of the replies in this thread are "it's not about the shooting itself, it's about the reactions."

Your comment asserting tribalism is tribalism itself. Or maybe just lower level general antagonism?

Nah, this is actual psycho behavior. If you told me my most hated outgroup influencer or politican got shot my immediate, gut reaction is "Oh, no! They're going to be insufferable after this."

This is because America is still in a talking battle. When we hear that "someone shot up a campaign event", most partisans will hope that their side was the one being attacked. Because that gives them a powerful story, and free reign to attack the outgroup as bad. Most partisans don't want to be in the position of having to explain why the rest of them shouldn't be blamed because one guy went and did something horrible.

You openly cheer for the deaths of people that you are in physical battle with. Where PR and optics are a negligible concern compared to who is left standing to write the history.

So what does it mean if the staff at a mainstream media company like TMZ think that they are in a war to the knife with Charlie Kirk?

They're claiming it was unfortunate timing:

We want to address something that happened during our TMZ Livestream coverage of the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

As Harvey and Charles were reporting the developments in our newsroom, there were employees in another part of the building watching a car chase.

The people watching that car chase began laughing and clapping in reaction to what they were seeing, but we want to make it clear ... they were not cheering in response to the assassination.

Nevertheless ... watching a car chase at that moment was tone deaf, and the sounds of laughter at that crucial moment were totally out of line.

We apologize to anyone who heard that as we were in the middle of covering such a tragic story.

I have no idea who or what TMZ is, so I have no opinion one way or the other if this is true, but it's only fair to give them a chance to reply.

The people watching that car chase began laughing and clapping in reaction to what they were seeing

That's either an insultingly implausible lie, or insane enough that it has to be true.

I mean, there are lots of "funniest car chases" and clips from police arrests online, it's not impossible someone was sharing "you gotta see this" and people were laughing and clapping because it was so stupid and entertaining that way. Just really unlucky timing.

Same with Jezebel and their "tee-hee, we got a witch to curse Charlie Kirk!" story. Published 8th September, since taken down. Probably because of stuff like this:

For the "POWERFUL HEX SPELL," I had to provide Kirk's date of birth for "accuracy." The witch performed the hex, but her response was unsettling: "I just completed your spell, and it was successful. You will see the first results within 2–3 weeks."

Same with Jezebel and their "tee-hee, we got a witch to curse Charlie Kirk!" story. Published 8th September, since taken down.

That one was pretty hilarious, and I honestly wish their editorial team had leaned into the "OH GOD THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO WE SWEAR" angle rather than the sanitized corpo-speak disclaimer they put up. Y'all had horrendously unfortunate timing, own it.

It also is absolutely going to give encouragement to those who are convinced witches are doing genuine harm (I don't believe spells work, but I also think mucking around with the occult like that is not a good idea either).

So congrats, Jezebel, you have now restoked the Satanic Panic.

Nah, this is actual psycho behavior. If you told me my most hated outgroup influencer or politican got shot my immediate, gut reaction is "Oh, no! They're going to be insufferable after this."

Yeah, this is me, in this thread, going "Damn these reactions are insufferable". But Kirk was far from someone who I would describe "most hated outgroup influencer" (I don't think I would ever use those words) - I just found his style extremely grating.

I haven't interacted with anyone in person whose reaction was more extreme than "how ironic".

A friend brought it up in the group Discord. He's, let's say "not as left as he thinks he is". But he raised the topic and immediately started with the "was the video AI manipulated to look worse?" And then when that was dismissed all around, worked in a "I'm sure there will be a lot of talk about politics and culture war before we learn in a week that it was a neighbor angry about the trash cans so we should probably just assume that, haha".

And the thing that struck me was that he came off as very defensive. Which is kind of unnecessary because as I said, he's really not as left as he thinks he is.

The other person who brought it up and had something to say was my mother, who cold opened a conversation with "Oh, I guess a Republican died? Boo hoo, thoughts and prayers." At least she isn't entirely gone; she responded like a human to being called out for it, but Christ.

The social media and it's consequences has been a disaster for the Boomer women.

The social media and it's consequences has been a disaster for the Boomer women.

For a cohort of GenX women too.

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