site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4mo ago (text post)   28485 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.

6
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

“u/magicalkittycat participated in a child sacrifice cannibal ritual on Mount Clinton. What, that’s a solid accusation, that makes it evidence, you have to refute this now, there’s evidence!”

Yes that is evidence normally. It's not strong evidence, but someone saying they witnessed it is a tiny adjustment upwards for Bayesian reasoning. It might be from say, .000001% to .0000011% or whatever, but yes it is evidence.

When you call random anonymous tip line accusations about child rape “evidence” you’re implicitly asserting that they’re credible. Otherwise, what kind of gotcha language game is this?

You can debate how useful that evidence is, I don't think on its own there is much. But it does exist.

In fact, there was enough evidence to at least cause a preliminary investigation into Trump. The Trump DOJ itself acknowledges this.

The Justice Department looked into sexual misconduct allegations against President Trump in connection with the sex offender Jeffrey Epstein but did not find credible information to merit further investigation, Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general, said on Sunday.

Why would they have investigated further at all unless the allegations had served as Bayesian evidence towards possible guilt?

Or what, is Pam Bondi getting angry at obvious bullshit supposed to be a crime now because Ted technically rigged the question?

He didn't ask if Trump committed a crime or not! He asked if the DOJ knows about the presence of any underage girls at the party Trump and Epstein had attended. She could have said "no, we are not aware of any" or something along those lines. Instead she falsely claimed there was no evidence of any crimes.

Or, we can accept this schizophrenic definition of evidence, where any accusation or implication made by anybody anywhere is evidence, and maybe we can agree on the following:

  • There is evidence that Donald Trump raped and murdered a little girl
  • There is evidence that Ted Lieu raped and murdered a little girl
  • There is a LOT of evidence that the 2020 election was stolen
  • There is evidence that the moon landing was faked by Stanley Kubrick
  • There is evidence that the Corona plandemic slash scamdemic was a Chinese plot by Anthony Fauci to poison us with mRNA technologies
  • There is evidence that a satanic pedophile cabal is running the Democratic Party and wants to install Hillary Clinton as president

Heck, I’ve even heard accounts in my lifetime that the aliens want to conquer earth for our stable supply of quartz, and you can tell which politicians are controlled by the demons by the shapes of their ears. It’s all in the book of OASPIE

There’s evidence for everything in the world! That’s what “evidence” means

Or, we can accept this schizophrenic definition of evidence, where any accusation or implication made by anybody anywhere is evidence, and maybe we can agree on the following:

This entire argument dismantles with the simple realization that different pieces of evidence can have different levels of strength to them. Yes a guy claiming he was abducted by an alien is evidence towards aliens abducting people. It's just extremely weak evidence, one that should update you from an absurdly low percentage to a still absurdly low (but slightly higher) percentage.

Edit: Also to note that again, the DOJ clearly found enough evidence to at least start a preliminary investigation into the matter per Todd Blanche's own words.

Big question here then, if allegations don't count as evidence whatsoever, then why would we ever investigate allegations? The response to something that doesn't move the needle at all would be to do nothing, the same way we don't randomly investigate a John Smith of Idaho for possible connections to a murder in Kansas. An example of a true non needle mover towards John Smith would be "it rained in Ottawa today". A needle mover is "I saw John Smith there in Kansas stabbing the victim"

Edit again: Actually even more obvious, if such allegations weren't a form of weak evidence then why do tip lines even exist? We would be wasting resources to not gather anymore evidence or direction on where to go.

Nobody really thinks an anonymous random or motivated accusation constitutes evidence. There is no evidence Trump raped and murdered a little girl. I think you’re committed to defending this ridiculous definition of evidence because the alternative is admitting that Bondi did not commit some kind of perjury, and you were wrong.

Nobody really thinks an anonymous random or motivated accusation constitutes evidence. There is no evidence Trump raped and murdered a little girl. I think you’re committed to defending this ridiculous definition of evidence because the alternative is admitting that Bondi did not commit some kind of perjury, and you were wrong.

I never said she committed perjury, that requires intent. Ted Lieu's accusations of perjury are quite weak in fact. Because it's reasonable to interpret "there is no evidence" as having meant "there is no credible evidence", the bar showing otherwise is quite high.

However, it is still an untruth as it's called to state that there is no evidence.

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