site banner
PaperclipPerfector  8d ago (text post)   22284 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 1, 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.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

France and Germany have crushing social welfare ponzi schemes that require an ever increasing number of young people. They need immigrants.

Denmark has pretty conclusively proven that MENA migrants are a net drain on the state, not a benefit. Sure there are a few winners: slumlords, the migrant industrial complex, and people who own shares in the discount retail sector.

Idk why European countries pretend the option is undereducated MENA immigrants vs nothing.

There's at least 3 billion people who would love to live in their countries. Surely there has to be a better way to sample from this population.

Every country on the planet wants rich, intelligent, very high skilled immigrants, but there just aren't that many of them available, and they have the entire world in terms of options.

Also, a lot of the political class literally can't tell the difference between good immigrants and bad immigrants. The Conservative government in the UK noticed that Indians and Nigerians in the UK earned lots of money, so they opened the doors to India and Nigeria, missing out the fact that the reason for these immigrant groups' overperformance was the selectivity of the immigration process. They invited so many that the average wages of Indians and Nigerians in the UK went from above the UK average to below the UK average.

They are so shackled by their blank slatism and fear of racism. Pro immigration in the year of our lord 2025 is the idea that genes and culture don’t matter.

Lack of executive function, as I also claim in my other comment.

The exact mechanism by which the executive function is lost is that both the "immigrants good" faction and the "immigrants bad" faction see their optimal marginal strategy as drumming up alignment with the simple and straightforward sentiments I labelled them by. A position like "more smart prosocial immigrants, but fewer stupid violent ones" will be ejected by the former camp because the "fewer" part just diluted and muddles immigrants-good sentiment; likewise, the latter camp will eject it for the "more" part having the same effect on immigrants-bad sentiment.

A position like "more smart prosocial immigrants, but fewer stupid violent ones" will be ejected by the former camp because the "fewer" part just diluted and muddles immigrants-good sentiment; likewise, the latter camp will eject it for the "more" part having the same effect on immigrants-bad sentiment

Executive function doesn't enter into it. The issue is that the two tribes have no reason to trust each other, and that there are too many people with the "accept compromise, but keep fighting" mentality, so the only rational strategy is to swing the status quo as extremely to your side as possible (even beyond what you might actually want), and then fortify it as best as you can.

I consider the ability to execute and maintain complex compromises to be part of what is the "executive function" of society as a compound organism, by analogy with the executive function of an individual.

I guess I'm not sure we're much of a compound organism anymore.

Selection systems work for the initial cohort, but family reunification policies dilute them. If you want durable intergenerational outcomes and want to avoid regression toward the mean of the origin population, you need selection criteria applied more consistently across visa categories, not just to primary applicants but to the broader family migration that follows.

Why have family reunification policies at all ? Individual, wife and child. That's it. Older parents should be able to get a visa as dependents, but never citizenship or social benefits.

Family chain migration is an exploit. Policy wise, it's an easy loophole to close. Politically, may be another issue altogether.

Does the wife have to qualify on her own or does she get in because the husband does?

Lots of successful men have stupid children because they selected their wives for reasons they may live to regret.

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