site banner
PaperclipPerfector  11d ago (text post)   25307 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 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.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Likewise when the Trump admin strips the legal status of people who came here properly

"Temporary actually means permanent" and "Biden's psycho paroling should be permanent" continue to be terrible positions and give away the game that most complaints about immigration from the left are salami-slicing at best.

One president can do what they want and it can never be undone is not a good policy. Everything flip-flopping on a 4 to 8 year basis isn't great policy either, of course.

Instead of telling Americans you're doing popular thing Y and then doing unpopular things X, just do the Y thing! Tell your extremists to settle instead of trying to appeal to them.

That more or less Denmark alone has managed this really begs the question of why its so difficult.

I guess Japan just elected what's supposedly their most right-wing government since before The War suggests it's not technically just Denmark, but may also suggest America is past some tipping point where it was possible.

Believe what you want about refugees but people who followed the rules as they were at the time are categorically not "illegal immigrants", and trying to motte and bailey the topic is not a successful PR strategy. The moderate swing voting Americans are not partisan brained enough to turn off their critical thinking like that.

That more or less Denmark alone has managed this really begs the question of why its so difficult.

Well one issue that we see with the Biden and Trump admins is that they're often more moderate than the people working under them. The extremists get into positions of power and work for approval from their social media tribes, blinding them to the worsening popularity. A captain isn't liable to remain popular if he can't stop the crew from pillaging, like if Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor while the merry men snuck behind back and beat the children up.

people who followed the rules as they were at the time are categorically not "illegal immigrants"

That's not quite what I said, either.

That they followed the rules of the time does not mean the rules of the time made any sense, or that the rules of the time must never be undone.

The moderate swing voting Americans are not partisan brained enough to turn off their critical thinking like that.

LOL you were alive in 2020, they absolutely are willing to turn off their critical thinking, or at least stay quiet and in hiding so the outcome is the same.

Non of the asylum seekers followed the law. It was being abused by the Biden administration. Non of them were ever true asylum seekers. It’s a word cell game they played.

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