site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   31033 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 16, 2023

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.

13
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

In the most famous case, Schwab was alleged to have told the public that, in the future "You'll own nothing and you'll be happy"

...

Instead, the WEF posted a video on its Facebook page

If you're going to deboonk the embarrassing rightoid conspiracy theorists, who lack baseline critical thinking ability, can you at least look up Know Your Meme? I have no idea what you're talking about, I never heard anything about a sinister announcement. The first I heard of it was literally from the Facebook video, and it was embarrassing enough to the WEF all on it's own, that they ended up taking it down, as well as the original article.

Other examples are myriad, but include in many cases phrases about 'eating bugs' and 'living in pods'. The former stems from a 2017 twitter post by the leftist magazine 'Mother Jones' (which, by the way, made fun of the idea of eating bugs) and some human interest stories by food blogs about eating bugs

Yes, us embarrassing conspiracy theorists absolutely did not look up things like Novel Food or Food 2030 research policies. We are guided like sheep by Mother Jones.

If you like lobster, you already eat "bugs".

This, and the bit about pods just sounds like "it's not happening, and if it's happening it's a good thing".

The fact that some people on the right unironically fall for this is embarassing.

No. Business, and government leaders aren't spending millions on this conference for fun, and public figures around the world are not simultaneously chanting the same slogans like "Build Back Better" by coincidence.

food 2030

I didn't see anything about bugs here. Did I miss it or is it unrelated?

Er... I should have gotten better links. Don't remember where I originally heard about the connection of the program to bugs, but curious_straight_CA found one mention. They also bring it up in this report:

Also future research should focus more on food from insects, e.g. by using food waste as source, but consumer acceptability still has to be improved in Europe; consumer studies and food safety studies could help to make better use of this protein source

It's a couple links in: the "10 Areas known as pathways to action" is a shell for this document, where :

As further explained by Fit4Food2030, humans need to consume sufficient amounts of protein for muscle-mass maintenance and overall health. Many sources of proteins other than meat (e.g. alternative proteins) already exist within the current assortment of food products (e.g. plant-based products). Still, investing in identifying and introducing other alternative protein sources into the human diet (e.g. edible insects, cultured meat, fungi and microalgae) could deliver the needed protein dietary intake without the potential negative health effects associated with the consumption of red meat and processed meat foods.

And later:

Within Horizon 2020, approximately 15 projects have been supported representing an investment of around EUR 70 million (116). Some key projects include:...

NEXTGENPROTEINS (2019-2023), IA, EUR 7.9 M.

Bioconversion of underutilised resources into next-generation proteins for food and feed. The project will address key barriers that limit the use of microalgae, single cell protein and insects in food/feed. It will, among other things, find means to improve consumers’ acceptability and trust.

SUSINCHAIN (2019-2023), IA, EUR 7.9 M.

Sustainable Insect Chain. The project contributes to novel protein provision for feed/food in Europe by overcoming the barriers to increasing the economic viability of the insect value chain and opening markets.

Thanks for digging. Doesn't seem like eating ze bugs is exactly a top priority shouted from the rooftops. Novel proteins can come from plants, algae, cell cultures, etc which I assume most people are fine eating.

FWIW I think of myself as pretty keyed into the "alternative protein space". I'm vegetarian and have donated to the good food institute for years. I don't see people talking about eating bugs. I don't see it in GFI's yearly review pamphlets. I don't see it in grocery stores or in /r/wheresthebeef or in startups that get press in the media.

Talking about eating bugs seems to be almost exclusively the province of WEF cinematic universe enjoyers and EU documents buried three links deep.

Talking about eating bugs seems to be almost exclusively the province of WEF cinematic universe enjoyers and EU documents buried three links deep.

Fair enough, though the thing that frustrates me in the whole conversation is the slippery slope fallacy fallacy. If 30 years down the line chicken is a luxury item, and you can only afford a bug schnitzel, are you going to say "shit, I guess the conspiracy theorists were right" or "what are you talking about you lunatic?! There was no conspiracy, it was all written in public documents"?

I guess I'd say they'd be right about the rise of eating bugs but I don't know if you can call it a conspiracy.

deleted

Novel proteins can come from plants, algae, cell cultures, etc which I assume most people are fine eating.

Most people prefer meat to all of those things -- "you vill eat ze algae" does not sound much better.

People prefer meat because it's much better tasting. Algae is not inherently gross the way bugs are, and people already eat it without disgust or culture war.

People like nori on their sushi -- this does not mean that they want nori to be all that they can afford to eat.

My point is that the disgust reaction isn't the real problem with this agenda -- "You vill not eat ze schnitzel" is just a bit less punchy.

The disgust reaction is a really big part of it. There's much more vitriol towards bugs than towards plant based schnitzel.

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