site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   29376 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 Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

That is not impossible, but I am very skeptical that, in 2023, someone thought it was a good idea to celebrate Black History Month by serving watermelon. That would have been cringe 40 years ago.

There are many cringe stereotypes from previous eras that are now inexplicably being reassesed as authentic ethnic and cultural expressions.

It's certainly not unanimous, and it has resulted in many eyebrow-raising episodes like this one. But I can absolutely see a well-intentioned 2020s progressive pushing for watermelon and chicken during Black History Month, and being caught completely flat-footed when this doesn't go over well at all.

I'm not totally sure that's what happened here, but its not remotely in the realm of disbelief either. The cultural consensus of the 90s and 00s continues to fracture further, so I no longer use it as a touchstone for how I predict people to largely act today.

The usual example of this with African American culture is black eyed peas(international name cowpeas), which, being beans, are far less easy to get people to actually want to eat. Although I suppose it’s possible.

Perhaps, but watermelon is particularly cringe, given its specific history. Though of course, I suppose the person in charge of the menu might be young and unaware of the history. But, if they were aware, and did it anyway, then Aramark should apologize and I rescind my statement that the incident is idiotic.

There are many cringe stereotypes from previous eras that are now inexplicably being reassesed as authentic ethnic and cultural expressions.

Not "inexplicably". The "cringe stereotypes" were based on authentic ethnic expressions.

That certainly seems to be the takeaway I'm left with, given how progs have boxed in these arguments. And I don't think they appreciate how psychically destructive it is. Like everything you were taught from your childhood upbringing to adulthood was actually just total bullshit, and we all decided this last year.

This is the kind of thing that annihilates any and all integrity of your political project, AFAIC. gj

I am very skeptical that, in 2023, someone thought it was a good idea to celebrate Black History Month by serving watermelon. That would have been cringe 40 years ago.

And yet somehow Aramark also managed to do so just four years ago. I feel like you are being exactly as skeptical as you should be, about exactly the wrong things.

All the more reason to think that it was not intentional this 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