site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3d ago (text post)   12938 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 19, 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.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The reason it matters that Ross was indeed struck is that it short circuits a lot of arguments. All the stuff from the NYTimes (among others) about how she was not trying to hit him and was clearly turning her wheel to avoid him goes up in a puff of smoke if he was (regardless of whatever else she was doing) clearly in danger, and being hit is really good evidence of that. Which is why many on the side crying murder still insist he was not hit. If he WAS in fact hit, you have to go to a lot of weaker theories, like

  1. He put himself in jeopardy. Not only doesn't this fit the facts (because he wasn't in front of the car until after it started moving), it doesn't fit the law; "officer-created jeopardy" is not an accepted doctrine.

  2. It was against ICE policy for him to be where he was. On shaky grounds factually, irrelevant legally; he can defend himself even if he wasn't in compliance with ICE policy

  3. He wasn't hit that bad. This doesn't really deserve more than a raised eyebrow... how was he supposed to know he'd only be essentially shoved aside by the SUV?

  4. He shouldn't have been there, because ICE shouldn't have been there. This is the real objection, but it's got no legal force.

The blog post says this:

To determine whether or not Ross’s shooting of Good was justified, we need to look at the facts of the incident itself. These might include such questions as: was Good aware of Ross’s position relative to her vehicle before she pressed the accelerator? did Good strike Ross with her car? if so, did she do so intentionally, or through negligence? did Ross have a reasonable fear (per the reasonable person standard) that his life was in danger? if so, was the amount of force he used proportional? and so on.

But no, the first two questions do not matter. We do not consider Good's state of mind when judging Ross's actions, because Ross had no way of knowing it. We need only consider whether Ross had a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm (it's the "death or great" which allows deadly force). He saw a 2-ton SUV being driven towards him. The argument that he should have known it wouldn't hit him falls to the fact that it did hit him, making this a very easy judgement.

he wasn't in front of the car until after it started moving … how was he supposed to know he'd only be essentially shoved aside by the SUV?

That is though why some people think he murdered her: He knew that he was only shoved because he faked/forced a shove.

First he switched the phone to his left hand so his right is free to shoot his gun. Then he positioned himself in the way, so it would not be dangerous for him but giving him plausible deniability. That is also why he immediately drew his weapon (even so that is useless to stop a moving car) instead of just making a step to the side.
The hole in the windshield is to the side aiming at Good with an angle, he was at the side on the car not in the front, and the other two shots were through the side window.

I can see your eyes rolling, but ICE does have a problem with fleeing cars which drivers are then shot:

https://archive.is/iQxsu

The Wall Street Journal has identified 13 instances of agents firing at or into civilian vehicles since July, leaving at least eight people shot with two confirmed dead. … The Minneapolis shooting shares characteristics with others the Journal reviewed: Agents box in a vehicle, try to remove an individual, block attempts to flee, then fire.

Most law-enforcement organizations reserve boxing in a vehicle for high-risk felony stops, such as when the suspect is armed, according to Geoffrey Alpert, a University of South Carolina professor who trained state and local officers at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers, a training operation run by DHS. If agents box in a target, the vehicles should be bumper to bumper, with no room for the suspect to drive away, essentially disabling the vehicle, said Alpert.

That is though why some people think he murdered her: He knew that he was only shoved because he faked/forced a shove.

No, that is not why some people think he murdered her. Entirely backwards. They think that he faked/forced a shove because that's the only way they can maintain their belief that he murdered her. The evidence that he somehow faked being hit by the car or forced the car to hit him simply is not there.

First he switched the phone to his left hand so his right is free to shoot his gun.

He switched the phone to his left hand about 8 seconds before the incident. It isn't clear why; perhaps his arm was tired or perhaps it got him a better angle.

Then he positioned himself in the way, so it would not be dangerous for him but giving him plausible deniability.

He did not position himself in the way. When the car started moving, he was not in the way. When she backed up and turned for the first half of the K-turn, he was THEN in the way.

The hole in the windshield is to the side aiming at Good with an angle, he was at the side on the car not in the front, and the other two shots were through the side window.

He fires the first shot almost simultaneously with being hit; he is at the driver's side corner (in front of the car, but not centered) at that point.

Ross drew his gun because Good was being placed under arrest and refusing to cooperate, that's why the other officer kept telling her to exit vehicle.

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