site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2d ago (text post)   11684 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 9, 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.

I guess you will not believe me, but in 2023 it was the case that I was kept from buying Amtrak tickets without as many adults as there are kids. Maybe it was a COVID rule. You have to admit, it would be weirdly specific for me to just make it up.

Where do you live that you see kids unattended all the time? I have never seen that since 2010 or so.

I don't think you made it up. I have no idea what happened, who told you what, what you saw on a website, or what the code that ran their online reservation system did in the past. But I did just go to the internet archive, since you gave me a date. Maybe things were different! I'm in a 'checking' mood today, I guess. Here is the same page on their website, but from January 2023, the first of the snapshots they have available from 2023. In the spot where they would have had the equivalent phrase, the wording is slightly different:

Passengers 12 years of age and younger must travel with an adult passenger who is at least 18 years old.

Again, I could imagine interpreting this either way. I don't have a way of verifying what the code on their website allowed/disallowed three years ago. However, that archived page also says:

One child ages 2 - 12 is eligible to receive a 50% discount on the lowest available adult rail fare on most Amtrak trains with each fare-paying adult (age 18+). If any additional child per adult will be traveling, reservations must be made for that child as an “Adult” and the full adult fare will be charged.

Infants Ride Free

One child under the age of two, not occupying a seat, may ride free with each fare-paying adult (age 18+). Additional infants can be booked as a “Child” and receive the 50% discount (if available) or as an “Adult” (if the Children's fare is not available).

I don't know how to interpret that in any way other than that you could have had more children than you had adults. It's just the discounts that adjust, depending on details. [EDIT: It is entirely plausible that the code they used to run their online reservation system in 2023 was broken and that resulted in rejects rather than discounting according to the stated rules. I can't check that. But their stated policy appears to allow it.]

Where do you live

I'm in the US. Not looking to give any more information than that.

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