site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3mo ago (text post)   42622 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.

Bluesky is, as we speak, dogpiling Gavin Newsom for saying political assassinations are bad. Yes it is an exaggeration to suggest that literally every single bskyist is like that, but it definitely seems like a prevailing sentiment to me. "All [place] is alight" is less of a declaration of universal characterization across all individuals, and more a general description of the room.

It is very strange how I must be on the backfoot arguing that radical violence-enjoyer leftists exist, year after year, when they completely color every corner of the internet that isn't a total right wing bubble. Especially today, when I can engage with literally any left-leaning website on its own terms and see tons of justifications of this attack, and a sickening glee for it. I am sure emotions run high now even for me, but does this tell you nothing? Do you think these people do not exist?

I agree that there are a lot of opportunistic right wing extremists using this as an excuse to appeal to normies, by the way. These accounts were only looking for a pretense to violence pill conservanormies. Sure. But their job is extremely easy when you can do what I did and immediately find tons of people cheering the attack. This is not a fringe element you have to go out of your way to find, you will instead be shouted at for not embracing violence enthusiastically enough all across the usual sites. Are you not seeing it? The temperature is not lowered by the fact that these right-wingers are, by a simple glance at the state of lefty internet spaces, apparently factually correct in their assessment that the prevailing leftist voice wants their audience dead.

All bluesky is now alight in celebration of the murder

I doubt /all/ of them are.

It is very strange how I must be on the backfoot arguing that radical violence-enjoyer leftists exist, year after year, when they completely color every corner of the internet that isn't a total right wing bubble.

I was in the same position as Doubletree or 4bpp yesterday, reflexively ascribing this to a few left extremists nutpicked by the algorithm. But "he got what was coming to him, I have no empathy" really does seem to be the prevailing vibe on Reddit at least.

I've done well enough insulating myself from leftist online spaces after we left Reddit, I had somehow forgotten what it's like.

The News mods were doing their damndest to trim that while still allowing discussion, though - I recall them putting a temporary lock on the thread so thay could catch up with all the reports.

I'm not saying these people don't exist. I'm saying two things:

  1. The conservative fascination with politic violence goes far deeper than just a few "right wing extremist" accounts. This is just what the whole 2A/tree of liberty stuff is about. I

  2. we are in this (bad) place because of a runaway tribal culture war dynamic. Highly emotive statements that are not measured or specific in their claims oftenmake this problem worse, not better, and so anyone who wants the temperature to decrease should be careful about how they frame their posts.

Especially today, when I can engage with literally any left-leaning website on its own terms and see tons of justifications of this attack, and a sickening glee for it.

I have personally observed many sickening statements concerning, for example, Kilmar Garcia, coming from conservatives. what would your point be exactly?

  • -11

I will just be upfront and tell you that my concern is because the reasons people list that make Charlie Kirk murderable are reasons that could easily justify killing me all the same. This from a great deal of people I know. Charlie Kirk's rap sheet is seldom even about any tangible Harms, but just having bad takes. That is why people are celebrating. This isn't equivalent to wishing ill will on someone who was factually an illegal immigrant. In a moral human nature sense these can be equivocated I suppose, and I don't actually think him spending the rest of his life in a Venezuelan torture hole is a just outcome, but I do not think that is a fair comparison to my neighbors implicitly expressing that they would want my arteries perforated if they knew better.

I understand where you're coming from. Though realistically these people celebrating, it's all performative, for all except 1e-6% of them.

This isn't equivalent to wishing ill will on someone who was factually an illegal immigrant

theres a difference, but it's not huge. It's a crime to be here illegally but not such a crime that they deserve to be shipped off to a supermax prison, probably sodomized, etc.

This is just what the whole 2A/tree of liberty stuff is about.

No it is not. 2A is not for shooting people who try to debate us. 2A is for shooting people that try to shoot us. Or apply other form of explicit, organized and widespread violence. Kirk tried to talk to people, that's what he was shot for. It's the opposite of what 2A is about.

Yeah, sure, that's the motte. The Bailey is shooting effigies of democratic politicians, brandishing firearms at unarmed leftist protesters, and posting up open carry at polling places.

Conservatives are more than happy to use firearms as a political intimidating tactic.

"Unarmed leftist protesters" are prone to physically attacking people, just ask Andy Ngo. And "unarmed" is such a weasel word - if somebody bashes you skull in with a brick, was he "unarmed"? What about metal bike lock? Skateboard? Plain old glass bottle? Or the same filled with petrol and set on fire? Given how easy it is to conceal a knife, is there even a way to know somebody is "unarmed"? Especially when you facing a mob dressed in a way that is specifically designed to make them intimidating? In some situations, where people are clearly behaving aggressively, it's only prudent to assume they may escalate - and take measures to deter then from doing that.

And have you heard about the group named NFAC? Using the initials only to make it SFW. To be clear, I support the right of these guys to own arms as much as any other person, but what they are doing with their legally owned arms is nothing but intimidation. And Black Panthers are know for posting uniformed big guys "unarmed" with clubs at polling places - just to make coming there more fun and welcoming, I am sure. So when discussing intimidation, let's remember that.

But the most important thing is this: if those conservatives would want to intimidate you, they'd say "stay away from me, or else". What the left is saying is different - "shut up and cease to spread your message, or else". And "or else", in this case, is clearly demonstrated as being murder. And the lower ranks of the left explicitly and enthusiastically endorse it. They don't say "how horrible it is that it come to that", they say "what a joyous day, let's murder Musk and Trump next!".

The conservative fascination with politic violence goes far deeper than just a few "right wing extremist" accounts. This is just what the whole 2A/tree of liberty stuff is about.

I don't think this is quite right. The role of the 2A in both historic and contemporary normiecon consciousness is to provide for the capability of organized (i.e., militia) resistance, not terrorist attacks and political assassinations.

Conservatives generally have a better understanding of the ramifications of violence, instead of the weird channeled Left tendency where 95% of groups are totally off-limits for wishing so much as a stubbed toe upon them and then absolute outlandish threats of violence on whatever the preferred boogeyman. Racism and Transphobia being held as the absolute worst things in the world (since they're approved targets), or the outpourings of deathwishes upon non-vaxxers

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