site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   29327 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 6, 2023

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.

11
Top Bottom New Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I agree with Okun, the things your society deems valuable and appropriate, it will reproduce via its institutions. If you don't belong to that culture, then you will have to either fit in or struggle. You can certainly try to alter what is considered valuable, that's much harder and not guaranteed to succeed. I also agree that there's no objective definition of what makes for a better culture in all aspects.

But the problem with the focus on talking about how "White Culture" reproduces its values is the terrible fucking optics of being so blind to the broader perspective. Not all truths are pleasant, but this is a case where it would be worthwhile for Okun to start asking about how valuable those things are in the first place. Okun certainly doesn't seem to be very positive about them, but I suspect that they are pretty damn important to most people. If I asked people "All else equal, would it be better for everyone to do their absolute best to be timely?" or the same for objectivity, I suspect I would nearly universally get affirmation. I'm aware that in some cultures, not being timely is considered at the very least acceptable, but I have yet to see anyone argue that those people think it is a good practice.

If I asked people "All else equal, would it be better for everyone to do their absolute best to be timely?" or the same for objectivity, I suspect I would nearly universally get affirmation.

What? No! Absolutely not!

This sentiment belies a total failure to understand why people sometimes aren't timely: because it's more important for them to spend time with their loved ones / doing the things they love, than to arrive on time for your sterile business meeting at a possibly Bullshit Job that didn't need doing anyway.

The tyrrany of the schedule is profoundly inhumane, never mind anti-white.

We'd all have more time for the important things in life if everyone else was more timely. Show up to work on time so we can all leave on time.

I really don’t understand this comment. If the meeting takes 1 hour it takes one hour of your time if it starts now or if it starts 10 minutes late. In fact, for all the other attendees it may now take 1hr10m of their time.

If the meeting is just wasteful and could be accomplished in 10 fewer minutes that is a separate problem.

But sticking to a schedule minimizes wasted time for everyone involved and thereby maximizes family time. This comment is the Motte going full-retard anti-PMC/bullshit jobs hot take

This comment is the Motte going full-retard anti-PMC/bullshit jobs hot take

The comment is downvoted, so I would say that it's really just one person's bad take and not the site as a whole.

This is ridiculous, by being late to scheduled meetings you are actually reducing the aggregate time everyone has for spending time with their loved ones and doing the things they love. If the meeting is bullshit that's its own problem but being timely strictly increases this thing you seem to think is in contest.

It's not just about the job. It's about timeliness in everything. Being on time for the end of your kid's soccer practice. Being on time so your spouse can do something else while you handle whatever they need.

In practice, I've seen this play out constantly. People set parties for 6 with the expectation no one will be there until 6:30 or even 7.

But the problem with the focus on talking about how "White Culture" reproduces its values is the terrible fucking optics of being so blind to the broader perspective. Not all truths are pleasant, but this is a case where it would be worthwhile for Okun to start asking about how valuable those things are in the first place.

This is a cost of getting too deeply into the social construction worldview. If you see something as literally not having value separate from its role in maintaining social hierarchy, it's definitionally impossible for you to ask how valuable those things are in the first place. The role in in maintaining the hierarchy is axiomatic to the value judgment.

I think it's just another in a long list of things that are entirely controversial because they are named incredibly poorly. If it were just called western or American culture it would at least be something people could reason about. But you drag the racial dynamic in and it's impossible. Okun can't accept that aspects of it are good because it would mean they're affirming the "white" culture over the "black/other" culture and they're constitutionally unable to do that.

I'm aware that in some cultures, not being timely is considered at the very least acceptable, but I have yet to see anyone argue that those people think it is a good practice.

This college course material suggests some advantages to lower emphasis on time.

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