site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2d ago (text post)   1761 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for November 23, 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.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

should note that Ross Douthat expressed some skepticism about Rod's approximation of the scope of the problem

I am not sure who to believe because in my area (very red state with a lot of Mormon and Evangelical presence) there are virtually no presence of groypers or groyper-adjacent propagandists, as far as I could see, but I am not sure who to believe about what happens in DC - and what happens in DC may have much more influence on the national politics.

I'd like to read Ross Douthat's view on that (link?) but I think it won't be able to convince me, on this stage, that groypers aren't a problem for Republicans. I may be very wrong on the size and importance of that problem, but it is the problem nevertheless. And it's not only a problem from my POV (which is obvious - I am not going to vote for a politician that genuinely considers me subhuman evil monster, whatever other position he could hold, I am only a human and have my limits) but from purely practical purpose - most of the normies won't flock to a platform that enables edgelords so far out of the consensus. At least unless they have something very attractive to offer, which groypers don't. And, also, if you want to bank all in on hating the Joos, there is enough competition to vote for on the other side, so you don't have any advantage even if you embrace that oldest of all low roads. Maybe if they ignore them enough they'd just wither away. Why couldn't we get lucky just this time?

Like everything else with Zoomers, this is all online. I’m not sure you would see a visible Groyper presence anywhere, no matter how much support there is.

Also the types of Christian conservatism pushed by actual God-fearing Christians (including Mormons) tend to be an antidote against some of the nuttier online stuff. The stereotypical right-idiotarian ticks the "Christian" box on the census but attends church at most three times a year.

The stereotypical right-idiotarian

I'll cop to being one of the people under discussion but this just seems like a boo-light to me. If you have actual specific arguments against right-identitarianism then make it by all means make them, but in the nicest possible way this seems like heat for the sake of it.

Uh, do you attend church regularly?

Not really, as I said. I mean to but when Sunday rolls around somehow ‘get up and spend an hour and ten minutes sitting still and being quiet’ never quite gets onto the todo list.

I’m not disputing Monzer’s point, but I dislike people throwing around silly slurs of ‘libtard’ and ‘right-idiotarian’. It’s not an argument, it’s a boo-light, and although I am not a mod I believe it is against the rules and not what the Motte is for.

Ah, I misread that as 'right-identitarian' and was wondering what you were up in arms about. My mistake.

No worries.

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