site banner
PaperclipPerfector  13d ago (text post)   24218 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 29, 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.

Sweden is most assuredly not like Venezuela and has been undergoing a steady economic liberalization for decades. That it has single-payer healthcare and a high tax rate is not a refutation of the former. They are in no way “as socialist as Venezuela”.

England: 69 million people, 55 billionaires

France: 66 million people, 52 billionaires

Sweden: 10 million people, 45 billionaires

For the latter, those aren’t oligarchs and cronies. They mostly come from retail (H&M) and tech (Spotify), etc. Please show me the Venezuelan equivalents.

Under Chavez/Maduro, Venezuela nationalized the steel industry (SIDOR), agriculture, banking (including Banco de Venezuela), gold mining, telecommunications, electricity, fertilizer production (e.g., Fertinitro), cement, and transportation. There were agricultural land reforms and redistribution of that land. And more recently food and agribusiness supply chains, supermarkets, construction, and petrochemicals were moved under state control.

Please show me an equivalent wave of nationalizations that occurred in Sweden.

An obvious but clumsy parallel would be perhaps Norway’s Oljefondet and its oil and gas industry. But not being run by a pair of tinpot socialists, they’ve never done anything as retarded as pegging their currency to the price of crude or firing all the petrochemical engineers not sufficiently loyal to the governing party.

Please show me an equivalent wave of nationalizations that occurred in Sweden.

The nationalizations happened long ago, and as noted started to privatize in the 90s. These are not the same timelines, so you won't see the same. Sweden used to be more socialized, Venezuela used to be more marketized and started changing more dramatically under Chavez (and the USA freaked out). But the point is they are both mixed economies at this point and not profoundly different. Do you have objective evidence to the contrary? Randomly listing cherry picked set a state owned enterprises (oooh scary) is not a substantive comparison.

Under Chavez/Maduro, Venezuela nationalized

I'm just going to list Chinese SOEs because that's easier for me, and I don't think you're willing to call modern China a socialist success story. Though I'll say right now you're right that there would appear to be more state owned enterprises in Venezuela than Sweden.

  • (SIDOR)/Baowu
  • banking (including Banco de Venezuela) / Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC)
  • gold mining / China Minmetals Corporation
  • telecommunications / China Mobile
  • electricity / State Grid Corporation of China (SGCC)
  • fertilizer / China National Chemical Corporation (ChemChina)
  • cement / China State Construction Engineering Corporation (CSCEC)
  • transportation / China Railway And so on.

Here is a gish gallop wiki link of Swedish state enterprises.

I tried asking an AI (Grok) to compare the private versus state aspects of comparative nations on the whole. Because I neither have the skillset nor the will to dig through hard stats myself, especially just for this post. Here's what it spit out, if you're curious:

Image summation if bottom text is annoying

Sweden
Indicator State/Public Share Private Share Notes
Government expenditure as % of GDP 49% N/A This represents total government outlays (including transfers, welfare, pensions, etc.), showing the state's role in redistribution. It does not reflect direct production.
Government final consumption as % of GDP 26% 74% This measures the public sector's direct contribution to GDP production (e.g., public services like education and healthcare). The private sector (including households and businesses) accounts for the rest.
Public sector employment as % of total workforce 29% 71% Includes employment in general government and state-owned enterprises (SOEs). Sweden has one of the highest public employment rates in the OECD.
SOE turnover as % of GDP 8% N/A SOEs (e.g., Vattenfall in energy, LKAB in mining) have a combined turnover of SEK 531 billion, representing a small but strategic state ownership in key sectors. Their direct value added to GDP is estimated at 2-3%. SOEs employ 137,000 people (2.6% of total workforce).

Overall estimate: The state (including public services and SOEs) accounts for roughly 25-30% of the economy in terms of production and employment, while the private sector dominates the remaining 70-75%.

Venezuela
Indicator State/Public Share Private Share Notes
Government expenditure as % of GDP 18% N/A Total government outlays (including transfers and subsidies); lower than many economies due to fiscal constraints and underreporting.
Government final consumption as % of GDP 12% (estimated) 88% Direct public sector contribution to GDP (e.g., services like education and defense); adjusted estimates amid economic volatility. Private sector dominates the remainder.
Public sector employment as % of total workforce 24% 76% Includes general government and SOEs; informal employment is high (44%), blurring lines.
SOE turnover/contribution as % of GDP 15-20% N/A Dominated by PDVSA (state oil company), which accounts for 95% of exports and an estimated 15-20% of GDP. Other SOEs in mining and energy add 5%.

Overall estimate: The state (including public services and SOEs) directly accounts for roughly 25-35% of the economy in terms of production and employment, with the private sector handling 65-75%—though much private activity operates under heavy state regulation and informal conditions. Key sectors like oil are almost entirely state-owned.

China
Indicator State/Public Share Private Share Notes
Government expenditure as % of GDP 33% N/A Total government outlays (including transfers, subsidies, and investments); moderate compared to welfare-heavy economies.
Government final consumption as % of GDP 17% 83% Direct public sector contribution to GDP (e.g., services like education and defense). Total final consumption is 56% of GDP, with households at 40%.
Public sector employment as % of total workforce 25-28% 72-75% Includes general government and SOEs; private sector supports 80-87% of urban employment.
SOE turnover/contribution as % of GDP 25-40% N/A SOEs generate significant value in strategic sectors; more recent analyses suggest 23-30% value added, though revenue figures can overstate due to costs.

Overall estimate: The state (including public services and SOEs) accounts for roughly 30-40% of the economy in terms of production and value added, while the private sector dominates 60-70%—though private firms often face state influence via regulations, subsidies, and partnerships.

State control =/= socialism either though

That just sounds like autocracy

Do Venezuelan workers own the means of production? No, they do not

I guess it is true that real socialism has never been tried. (At least by any nation state.)

No country with a Bentley dealership can be socialist.

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