site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5d ago (text post)   24525 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 5, 2026

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.

A woman in Minneapolis has been killed in an altercation with ICE. I don’t really trust any of the narratives being spun up. Here are two three angles:

Angle 1

Angle 2 [Twitter] [youtube]

Angle 3 (Emerged as I was writing this)

This is actually a fairly discussed type of shooting. Law enforcement confronts a person in a vehicle, the LEO positions himself in front of the vehicle, the person in the vehicle drives forward, and the cop shoots the person. Generally, courts have found that this is a legitimate shoot. The idea being that a car can be as deadly a weapon as anything.

Those who are less inclined to give deference to law enforcement argue that fleeing the police shouldn’t be a death sentence, and that usually in these situations the LEO has put himself in front of the vehicle.

I have a long history of discussing shooters in self-defense situations [1] [2] [3] and also one of being anti-LEO. However, I’m softer on the anti-LEO front in the sense that within the paradigm in which we exist, most people think the state should enforce laws, and that the state enforcing laws = violence.

The slippery slope for me: “Fleeing police shouldn’t be a death sentence”

“Resisting arrest shouldn’t be a death sentence”

“If you just resist hard enough, you should be able to get away with it”

People really try to divorce the violence from state action, but the state doesn’t exist without it.

The ICE agent's actions were probably legal. But most normies will conclude at the woman should not have been shot dead. There is no dissonance between these 2.

The shooting itself is secondary. The peripheral conversations are more interesting.

First, there is a reason that countries avoid too many domestic law enforcement agencies. Civilians have context and learned behaviors for how to deal with the authoritative law enforcement agency (Cops). Civilians have zero context on how to engage with an ICE officer. Which laws do they abide by (local, state, federal) ? How do I recognize them ? What are my rights ? Am I entitled to bail ? etc. The context hole is filled in by aesthetic. ICE officers appear as masked men with guns who use excessive force to chase down people who (for the most part) haven't hurt anyone. The aesthetic is terrifying and the average civilian would understandably try to flee. MAGA itself has promoted this paramilitary like view of ICE, and people are correctly responding to it with fear.

There is rhetorical sleight of hand. ICE officers are cops in terms of discretionary power, but held accountable to none of the same standards as cops. In classic fashion, Republicans care about states rights until it's their guy in power. #TeamDoubleStandards.

Besides, why are 'tom and jerry chase' and 'headshot' the only 2 options available to an officer ? She was leaving. They could have let her go and found her later. This isn't some seasoned drug dealer that will camp out in another state. They could've just arrested her later.

Hell, the dude could have just not stepped in front of the car. It's not rocket science. In fact, it is specifically prohibited by a large number of police precincts around the country. I asked Chatgpt to find me some sources and consolidation of general best practices across police precincts and this is what it found for me.

  • Not standing in the path of moving vehicles,
  • Not creating a situation where a vehicle’s motion becomes the basis for deadly force,
  • Limiting shooting at vehicles to true, independent deadly threats sources 1

In fact, MinneapolisPD is explicit about avoiding being in front of cars.

So yeah, the fed may get away with it. But at the very least, his actions were amateurish and caused the unnecessary death of a civilian.

Finally, the broad optics are just plain bad for Trump. The Somali scams were a slam dunk for his govt and Republicans could have built the 2026 midterm campaign on it. Instead, by killing a white mother on ground zero, the narrative has immediately shifted away from the Somalis.

It wasn't just the killing. Trump's response was despicable. The video isn't vindicating (unlike Rittenhouse) and it appears to validate many of Democrats accusations of ICE acting more like the mob than cops. Statistically speaking, increasing ICE action in Minnesota has led to an increase in the death of Americans by 1. Obama was already deporting the criminals quite effectively. Deportation of otherwise lawful civilians does not require guns, let alone deadly force.

There is no good angle for MAGA here. I'm seeing many popular right wingers (DeSantis was the most surprising) condemn the shooting. This is a big L.

The ICE agent's actions were probably legal. But most normies will conclude at the woman should not have been shot dead. There is no dissonance between these 2.

There's plenty of dissonance, but it's resolved simply by noting which side the majority of the mainstream media is on.

First, there is a reason that states do not have multiple domestic law enforcement agencies.

There may be reasons they shouldn't, but in fact they do. The rest of this paragraph was irrelevant; this woman knew who ICE was and furthermore, ordinary cops go after nonviolent criminals all the time.

There is rhetorical sleight of hand. ICE officers are cops in terms of discretionary power, but held accountable to none of the same standards as cops.

This is also a false claim, although you're probably overestimating the standards ordinary cops are held to.

Besides, why are 'tom and jerry chase' and 'headshot' the only 2 options available to an officer ? This isn't some seasoned drug dealer that will camp out in another state. They could've just arrested her later.

At the time the cop pulled his gun, she was driving her SUV right at him. You're implying that if he had the option to get out of the way of a person who was fleeing, apparently homicidal and in control of a truck, he should have done it rather than take action to stop her right there and then. I do not believe this is a standard police are ever held to ordinarily.

Hell, the dude could have just not stepped in front of the car. It's not rocket science.

Preventing people from fleeing, including by placing themselves in their path, is in fact part of a police officer's job.

I asked Chatgpt

You can't trust the robot.

Finally, the broad optics are just plain bad for Trump.

Optics are within his opponent's control.

Trump's response was despicable. The video isn't vindicating (unlike Rittenhouse) and it appears to validate many of Democrats accusations of ICE acting more like the mob than cops.

Trump blames the dead woman, saying she was trying to run over the officer. But even The Guardian, in attacking Trump, admits the officer was actually hit, as some of the videos show. That's pretty vindicating.

Instead, by killing a white mother on ground zero, the narrative has immediately shifted away from the Somalis.

Could be worse, they could have killed a black guy.

Statistically speaking, increasing ICE action in Minnesota has led to an increase in the death of Americans by 1.

That's not statistical anything.

Deportation of otherwise lawful civilians does not require guns, let alone deadly force.

Unless of course those otherwise lawful citizens decide they don't want to be deported. But this wasn't a deportation anyway.

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