site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   27958 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 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.

4
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The very understandable reaction: "fuck it, you're calling me a Nazi, I might as well be one."

So are you saying you're a Nazi then? I guess add another on the pile of growing unashamed nazism.

  • -50

If this be nazism, make the most of it.

"Nazi" in the current parlance just means "politically sane".

"Nazi" in the current parlance just means "politically sane".

Are swatiskas "politically sane?" Is "We like Hitler?" politically sane? Is Holocaust denialism politically sane? Because those are the things being called Nazi in this post.

  • -14

"Sidney Sweeney's jeans ad is nazism"

"Wtf I love Hitler now"

The saying goes that leftism is basically just pretending not to understand simple concepts, making dialogue untenable.

Are swatiskas "politically sane?"

Be very careful clicking on this link, as those of sensitive sensibilities may be shocked to a degree hazardous to health. I realise that I am outing myself as a regular viewer of their disgusting Nazi-themed output, but truth must prevail!

Honestly, yeah. Those are signals of tribal allegiance - signals of belonging to the right-wing vanguard. Nobody really gives a shit about in how far the Holocaust really happened, the swastika isn't some magic rune that makes Wunderwaffen strike down your enemies, and whether someone likes Hitler or not makes no difference because Hitler has been dead for 80 years. What matters is that the sacred cows of the left are being butchered. That is the thing that actually bothers the left, and the thing that actually tickles the right.

Honestly, yeah. Those are signals of tribal allegiance - signals of belonging to the right-wing vanguard. Nobody really gives a shit about in how far the Holocaust really happened,

That doesn't seem to match the behavior and words of conservative influencers like Ben Shapiro, Seth Dillon, EW Erickson, Dinesh D'Souza etc unless your argument is that even the conservatives who claim to be against Nazism are lying and don't actually care.

Very pessimistic view of modern conservativism IMO. I disagree with it, I think most conservatives still are opposed to neonazism. But I suppose I can't prove they aren't all lying about it.

  • -14

unless your argument is that even the conservatives who claim to be against Nazism are lying and don't actually care.

My argument was about those who display sympathy for nazism, not those who try to earn good boy points for chanting "nazi bad".

This appears to me to be engaging in bad faith. Either that or it's a low effort attempt at a zinger. Either way, don't do this.

I'm asking for clarification. He literally said

"I might as well be one" is understandable to him.

This is basically saying "I am a Nazi" but of course in good faith I assume that the large majority of people I interact with are not Nazis. I suppose I could interact in bad faith and just assume he literally means it and has embraced Nazism if you prefer.

  • -20

If you're genuinely failing to understand the point, then this explains a great deal. I don't really want to speak for @crushedoranges but saying you understand why someone feels the way they do does not necessarily mean you feel the same way. That is in fact one of the purposes of the Motte, to explicate your viewpoint in a way that people who don't share it can understand why you hold it.

I am not sure what to do about you if you lack this basic perceptual ability, because if someone says "I understand why people being called Nazis would decide to embrace the label" and your interpretation is "You're a Nazi," there is a pretty large inferential gap that isn't conducive to heated engagements.

No, you can speak for me. It's fine.

Amadan wtf is this mod judgement? Appears to be engaging? Do you have any proof other than your feelings? What does “don’t do this” even mean?

I’ll say it again; you are a terrible mod and need to give it up to new blood.

  • -25

I really thought after your last flounce we'd seen the last of you. Too optimistic on my part.

nah fam, this isn't it. He is a pretty good mod that if anything isn't going hard enough on the Darwin alt.

Giving everyone involved credit where credit is due, Darwin was never banned so doesn't need an alt if he wants to come back in and Just Start Asking Questions again.

Instead, they come across as a sort of 'Why aren't you getting back in the longhouse' style of moral harassments that's honestly aghast as to why thier decades-old tactics aren't functioning properly anymore.

I'm assuming he uses alts because it's more effective to troll when you don't have a reputation for doing so. If your interlocutor thinks you are a normal mottizen, he is more liable to offer charity and make several attemps to discuss things with you; where you can try to get a rise out of them and get them banned or at least a warning.

Perhaps, yes. But Darwin's argumentative style was fairly distinct in that he operated in isolation, stripping everything of context and focusing on single and individual elements and proceed to wear the argument down until you more or less gave up while refusing to concede ground on what he choose to argue about.

Hence why I don't think it's a Darwin alt.

Stop, you'll hurt my feelings.

Didn't you flounce already to "show me"? Why did you create a new account? Your old account wasn't banned. Do you think coming back with a new account means it doesn't count as flouncing? Now you're in the new user filter again. See what a kindly mod I am, unfiltering you just so you can bitch at me?

Trying real hard to be maximally charitable, but it appears you misread that statement and might need to reread the comment.

It's been made very clear over the last few years that when leftists say "Nazi", they mean a family with a mom and dad who love each other and their kids, people who work out, people who are attractive and successful, people who are mentally healthy, who aren't unhinged neurotic messes and people who don't hate themselves for no reason.

Why, what did you think that word meant?

You want to call all of the right wing Nazis, so that doesn't make me particularly special in that regard. Give me some credit. I'm not stupid. Obviously you made this post not out of a desire for sincere debate but to tar every Republican as a Nazi by association.

So call me a Nazi if you'd like. So what? What does that change? What should a hot-blooded American do to a Nazi? Tell me what you're darkly hinting at.

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