site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5mo ago (text post)   42883 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.

If they had bombed the college basketball stadium or the NYC auditorium at which I saw him speak, would that have been acceptable?

If the ChiComs bombed an entire baseball stadium or auditorium, packed with civilians, I would consider this an act of war. It would evince a grievously callous lack of regard for civilian lives. However, if they planted a bomb on the Dalai Lama’s limo and blew it up, killing only the inhabitants of that car, I would see this as a legitimate act which could be smoothed over diplomatically.

Similarly, if the Ukrainians shot down Putin’s plane over American airspace, I would not consider it an overly aggressive act against American sovereignty; it would be an obviously targeted act against an indisputable geopolitical foe of theirs, and if the only collateral damage to America was embarrassment about our lack of airspace security, that would be something I could live with.

There seems to be a fundamental difference, though, between a traditional assassination and one using military means. If a foreign actor shot someone on American soil for political reasons it's different than them sending their air force in and bombing their house. One is a criminal act, the other an act of war.

Well that's tough for the Qataris then. If you're going to fund proxies to try to militarily destroy another nation, that nation might decide they don't want to play by your particular rules of engagement.

The Qataris that funded Hamas with explicit Israeli approval.

For years, the Qatari government had been sending millions of dollars a month into the Gaza Strip — money that helped prop up the Hamas government there. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel not only tolerated those payments, he had encouraged them.

During his meetings in September with the Qatari officials, according to several people familiar with the secret discussions, the Mossad chief, David Barnea, was asked a question that had not been on the agenda: Did Israel want the payments to continue?

Mr. Netanyahu’s government had recently decided to continue the policy, so Mr. Barnea said yes. The Israeli government still welcomed the money from Doha.

I want off of Mr. Netanyahu's wild 4d chess ride. So his goal is to preserve Hamas and deny a possible peaceful resolution?

So why exactly did the Israelis support this policy?

Israelis generally likely wouldn't, but Netanyahu and co use Hamas as a justification (especially to their domestic opposition) to refuse to negotiate in good faith let alone negotiate a longer-term political solution to the conflict, e.g., a two state solution which is the preferred and endorsed "solution" by the overwhelming vast majority of the world for many decades and, at the time, a sizeable portion of Israelis. Netanyahu and co can claim they have no "viable partner for peace" as long as Hamas is in control.

It's important to remember, Netanyahu and co very nearly lost that battle when Yitzhak Rabin was elected PM in 1992 on making peace and who genuinely engaged in dialogue with the Palestinians to work towards a lasting peaceful political solution with the Oslo Accords and Peace Process. Or he was until he was assassinated.

Additionally, Netanyahu and co think of Hamas as not being particularly dangerous; Israel would simply need to go in and "mow the grass" from time to time to keep them beaten down.

So they constantly serve as a placeholder who murder any upstart rivals and prevent a more palatable (to negotiate with) group coming to the front in the Gaza strip as well as prevent a united group across the Strip and the West Bank.

The article is paywalled. Nevertheless, I may be misinformed on this.

I definitely agree that this distinction is useful, although frankly if the Chinese air force could pull off a strike with such precision that they could blow up the Dalai Lama’s house without hitting anything else around it, I’d have to just say “well played”. I’d be more mad at my own government for not being able to intercept it.

You might say that but I doubt the American government or indeed the American public would feel the same way. Media would report it as the only time the US mainland has ever been bombed and the first bombing of US territory since WWII. We would respond militarily, even if it was just a Doolittle-style raid to show we could do it.

I don't think the American public would really believe that a Chinese bomber could get into US airspace without being intercepted. The Americans are supposed to have the best air force in the world. If someone gets bombed by a stealth bomber in the the mainland USA, I think most people would rightly assume that the Americans must have done it (or allowed it).

I don’t think it would certainly result in US military action against China. If they were willing to let the US save face and said it was an overzealous action by a rogue general and made trade concessions they might even get away with it.

Media would report it as the only time the US mainland has ever been bombed and the first bombing of US territory since WWII.

The media might well report it that way, but the US mainland was bombed (as in, from the air) in WWII.

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