site banner
PaperclipPerfector  7d ago (text post)   25526 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 2, 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.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

but it doesn't have that much on the Republican side in the age of the Trump Cult.

Or the democrat side. Biden sat pretty far outside the post-watergate norm for domestic policy pressures, and the unwillingness to acknowledge that is a major reason that stasis is unfixable. Cultural republicans have rights, and if we have to choose us or you to be oppressed, guess what we pick.

Biden sat pretty far outside the post-watergate norm for domestic policy pressures

Biden wasn't far outside the norm compared to recent presidents.

Cultural republicans have rights, and if we have to choose us or you to be oppressed, guess what we pick.

False dichotomy. Wokeism was a cancerous political movement, but the reaction from the Right should have been to defeat it conventionally, not to devolve into Trump Cultism nor to treat it as a blank check to engage in nearly unlimited political hypocrisy (e.g. Trump's open corruption).

False dichotomy. Wokeism was a cancerous political movement, but the reaction from the Right should have been to defeat it conventionally, not to devolve into Trump Cultism nor to treat it as a blank check to engage in nearly unlimited political hypocrisy (e.g. Trump's open corruption).

If it could be defeated conventionally, why didn't the Democrats do it? Why didn't any of the never-Trumpers?

Never-Trumpers never had much purchase beyond the Republican party as a coherent faction. As for Democrats, the centrist wing was a decent portion of the reason why the leftist fringe has lost so much power over the past few years.

Never-Trumpers never had much purchase beyond the Republican party as a coherent faction.

On the Republican side, the only person who even tried offering an alternative way to combat wokeness was DeSantis. The old establishment is as woke as the Dems and some of them even changed parties.

As for Democrats, the centrist wing was a decent portion of the reason why the leftist fringe has lost so much power over the past few years.

The time when the centrist wing of the Democrats was at the height of it's power was the exact moment we hit peak woke. Wokeness still has an iron grip on the party, their leaders just finally realized it's not popular so they're kinda trying to keep on the down-low (and only kinda).

To the extent we're seeing less wokeness now then we used to, this can only be attributed to Trump winning. The day the election results were announced was the day corporations started backing out of it.

I feel like we have a lot of differences in our definitions here:

  • Desantis was certainly not the only Republican to combat wokeness. Are you referring to him trying to build an entire alternative ecosystem here?
  • I would not call peak woke as being the "height of the centrist wing of the Democrats' power" by any means. "Power" to me means the ability to implement the change you want vs. the change someone else wants. Biden may have been President, but he had woke staffers running roughshod over a lot of policies both in theory and in practice.
  • Trump's victory accelerated the process of woke burnout that was already occurring. It was not the cause, it was the death-knell.

Desantis was certainly not the only Republican to combat wokeness. Are you referring to him trying to build an entire alternative ecosystem here?

Maybe, it depends on what you mean. He's the only one that comes to mind that combats it in a comprehensive and systemic way, rather than just making a lot of noise about an issue of the day, but otherwise letting the woke run all the institutions.

Biden may have been President, but he had woke staffers running roughshod over a lot of policies both in theory and in practice.

This is because the centrist democrat wing is woke, so they pick woke staffers.

Trump's victory accelerated the process of woke burnout that was already occurring. It was not the cause, it was the death-knell.

Nope. There is no woke burnout. Like I said they kinda dialed it down for the moment, until they win another election. And only kinda, if you listen, you can hear all he insanity coming out of the usual places.

This is because the centrist democrat wing is woke, so they pick woke staffers.

They're not. You can look at the evolution of someone like Noah Smith to see an example. He went from pretty woke in his Bloomberg days to heavily criticizing wokeness while still being left-leaning today. Back in 2021 some Dems still didn't have antibodies to the woke mindvirus which is part of why Biden picked some of them. That, and "staffers" are kind of their own unique breed that have been radicalized by the internet on both sides. The Right has an increasing problem with its own staffers being groypers these days.

There is no woke burnout.

There very clearly is. The woke faction still exists certainly, but it's much less powerful than in its heyday.

They're not. You can look at the evolution of someone like Noah Smith to see an example. He went from pretty woke in his Bloomberg days to heavily criticizing wokeness while still being left-leaning today

How does this prove that centrist Democrats aren't woke, and won't come back to promoting wokeness the moment they secure their power again?

Back in 2021 some Dems still didn't have antibodies to the woke mindvirus which is part of why Biden picked some of them.

They already had lots back in 2016. They just decided to purge them. Because they are woke.

That, and "staffers" are kind of their own unique breed that have been radicalized by the internet on both sides. The Right has an increasing problem with its own staffers being groypers these days.

Did you just link to an article about a group of staffers for being mildly edgy, and said that explains centrist Democrats somehow weren't in power because of their staffers?

There very clearly is. The woke faction still exists certainly, but it's much less powerful than in its heyday.

There isn't. They lost power to Republicans, not some faction of anti-woke Democrats. Some of them realized they should keep quiet to not lose elections, but there's no evidence that the Democrats are any less woke than they use to be.

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