site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2mo ago (text post)   2955 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for September 21, 2025

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This isn't a question but rather a statement. But I would like to hear what you think.

So I didn’t care for Charlie Kirk, and I’m not Christian (though I think they're pretty cool in general). But the fact that Erika Kirk, his widow, stood up and forgave the man accused of murdering her husband is staggering.

In an era where public life is fueled by score-settling and astounding cruelty this feels like a rare moment of moral progress. It’s counter-cultural in a good way: mercy instead of vengeance.

Here's an article from The Guardian about it

It's especially notable when you compare this act to yesterday’s generation of right-wing Christian political leaders, who would’ve absolutely doubled down on punishment and wrath. Can you imagine, fucking, Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Falwell or Robertson forgiving someone that murdered their spouse? Yeah right.

And just to remind us of the previous era that needs to finish going the way of the dinosaurs, Trump himself openly said on stage right next to her that he hates his enemies and doesn’t care what Erika just said about what Jesus says about forgiveness.

To see Erika Kirk take the opposite stance, forgiveness, love, mercy, is unexpectedly hopeful. I am appreciating the small bit of moral progress on the Christian right here.

It’s good optics, an especially sharp contrast to the gravedancing we saw last week. But it isn’t especially surprising for serious Christians. Pope John Paul II famously forgave the man that shot him, which was especially meaningful as he directly requested (and was granted) a pardon for the assassin. That said, I am too pessimistic to think this will do anything. I think the media landscape is too fragmented. The vast majority of leftists will simply never hear her remarks. And even if they do, echochambers will ensure they are provided with readymade dismissals to avoid ever feeling an unpleasant “are we the baddies?” thought.

I think of Bin Laden’s aphorism that people will prefer the strong horse. Ultimately the left is killing their enemies and celebrating it, that seems like strength to me. Forgiving them feels like a flavor of Trudeau style “if you kill your enemies they win” cuckoldry, which is vaguely repulsive to most. I’m not sure which will prove the more powerful influence

Ultimately the left is killing their enemies and celebrating it, that seems like strength to me.

To a first approximation, anyone can kill anyone. Doing so doesn't meaningfully require strength. Doing so without repercussions, sure, but that's not what happened here.

I don't think this is true. I think most humans are generally unwilling to murder, either out of instinct, moral training, or fear of consequences. Finding someone both willing and able to murder your opposition is, I'd guess, rare.

I agree. That means that strength is not the main bottleneck to murder though.

I guess unless we define strength using the edgelord xianxia "absence of scruples and willingness to do anything to anyone to advance your own interests" definiton.

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