site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3d ago (text post)   11621 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 15, 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.

The only problem is that most multi-unit buildings require a key, and guests have to be buzzed in. They're also likely to be under video surveillance.

The only problem is that most multi-unit buildings require a key, and guests have to be buzzed in. They're also likely to be under video surveillance.

A very common setup in places like Boston is that there will be an outer door (which is always unlocked) which leads to an entry area with an inner door which is locked. You need to be buzzed in (or have a key) to get through the inner door, but anyone can walk into the entry area. The article I had read (which admittedly I did not read very carefully) seemed to imply that he was killed in that area.

I can't say I've ever seen a situation where that would pose an an actual barrier. People are always propping doors or letting someone through at the same time as them.

My own experience as a missionary who did door to door tracting in apartment buildings: just start ringing random apartments and you'll find someone who will buzz you in without even talking to you

Wildly speculating here, but if he knew/recognised the person (who had waited for him to show up) then he might bring them into the foyer with him.

But this is all armchair detective theorising at present,.

most multi-unit buildings require a key, and guests have to be buzzed in.

Is that an actual barrier, or a polite fiction? I've definitely seen people follow others into apartment buildings, or enter as people are leaving, or bypass the lock in other ways. I don't think it's a substantial barrier on the scale of an assassination.

Depends on the building. If it's a large building with a transient population, you can walk in behind someone and act like you live there and they won't question it. But it looks like this was a small building, and if a professor lives there there's a greater chance that it's the kind of place people stay a while. From the pictures it looks like there are maybe four apartments per entrance. In a building like this, it's probable that everyone knows their neighbors, which makes surrepetitiously entering much more difficult.

Indeed, particularly in the age of DoorDash and Amazon, there are always delivery people coming in and out at all hours. It’s completely trivial to tailgate into the building behind one of them.

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