site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2d ago (text post)   6540 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 8, 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.

To what extent is this applied fairly in England? E.g. if someone posts "death to the Jews" or "English people should all die in a fire," do they get Big Brother knocking on their door?

I prefer American speech norms, but if it's a matter of different cultural approaches to conflict and politeness, I don't object to it. Different folks, different strokes.

if someone posts "death to the Jews" or "English people should all die in a fire," do they get Big Brother knocking on their door?

You will have to clarify if the individual is a white Briton (in which case they will throw the book at him) or not.

These 'non-crime hate incident' investigations and other 'hate crime' investigations seem to be clearly directed at white heritage British and not at minorities. Its why there are claims of 'two tier policing'. There's plenty of YouTube clips out there comparing similar behavior between the majority/minorities and the differing official response.

I didn't see the need for American style free speech norms until I saw the path that the UK has chosen to go down. Other Western nations are struggling with how to respond with mass migration and multi-culturalism and suppression of the heritage majority seems to be cheap low hanging fruit for their governments.

To what extent is this applied fairly in England? E.g. if someone posts "death to the Jews" or "English people should all die in a fire," do they get Big Brother knocking on their door?

What do you think? They're still dragging their heels about the rape gang fiasco, you think they'd do anything approaching fairness regarding Muslim shitposting?

A quick search reveals several counterexamples, to say nothing of those with non-Muslim perpetrators, but I guess vibeposting is more satisfying.

Thanks for pulling in some actual counterexamples, that was interesting for me to learn. It's good to hear the opposite side of the story now and then.

I'm sorry how is that a counterexample to anything we've posted so far?

ThenElection's post seems to imply that "death to Jews", "English people should die in a fire" exist on the same vein of hate speech that would be opposing Muslim/Trans hate speech. I guess to some extent that makes sense because of Muslim/Jew enmity. But it's smuggling in too much to pretend the the fairness here on most people's mind is not white person, nationalistic person, straight person, conservative person, and not just that Jewish is treated as a protected class along with Muslim.

There are a couple different speech policy regimes that could exist in England, all consistent with "you're not allowed to criticize Muslims or migrants." I'm just trying to get a better sense of which one best describes England.

  1. Muslim supremacy: you can't criticize Muslims, but white people and especially Jews are fair game.

  2. Inter-ethnic protections: you aren't allowed to criticize people outside your ethnicity.

  3. Wokeness: depends on who, whom, and the particular ordering of the progressive stack. 1) is kind of a degenerate version of this.

  4. Universalism: no one is allowed to criticize anyone aggressively.

None of those are my preference, but 2) and somewhat 4) seem like defensible approaches. My guess is that 3) is closest to what's happening, but that's just based on Twitter vibes.

But this illustrates why free speech is important. Let’s assume ad arguendo that Muslims are in fact making Britain worse. If you categorically remove the ability to question problems (eg increasing Muslims and encouraging Muslims to stay is making Britain worse), then you either (1) end up with a worse country and/or (2) remove it from a political discussion into a violent one.

Asking a question instead of making (plausible) assumptions. Some cultures do take being polite more seriously than child rape.

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