site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   26449 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 23, 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.

The Iranian people have significant support for the US and Israel.

The diaspora does, and a few malcontents inside the country do. But they're probably few and definitely powerless, and thus irrelevant. Their older generations were basically all supporters of the regime, and their younger generations grew up drinking in the propaganda of the regime; I doubt there's too much discontent outside their version of the PMC.

Counter arguments:

Stats: "A June 2024 survey by GAMAAN showed only 20% of respondents want the Islamic Republic to remain in power, with only 11% supporting the foundational principles of the 1979 revolution."

Anecdote 1: I know some people in the diaspora who are recent exiters. Everyone they know both at home and abroad not directly connected with the regime is ecstatic.

Anecdote 2: I've seen footage of bombing in Tehran where you can hear people cheering in the background.

In my city that has a large Iranian diaspora, the "protests" are actually pro bombing with iranians carrying american and israeli flags it's surreal. The small anti bombing protests tend to be white college kids.

My favorite bit of this was all the pretty Iranian woman trying to learn Trump's YMCA dance a few weeks ago.

Although at this point as the realities are setting in people are getting more stressed.

You have made the point repeatedly that there exist significant portions of the American public rooting against America in the present war.

Do you think the United States would fall as a result of similar circumstances?

I'm not sure that's related to my point.

It should give you context as to why Nixon wins the election even if I don't know anyone who voted for him.

GAMAAN

It's an Internet poll issued through an anti-censorship provider. Very non-representative. Same for the diaspora. As for footage from Iran... the information environment is terrible, who even knows if it's real?

All of that is fair but it is what we have in terms of knowledge. We also have recent massive protests that required 1,000s of killings to stop. We also have a security apparatus observed in Iran that sure is looking like it was very hard to prevent an uprising.

Do we have any evidence for widespread support for the regime? Hiding and not wanting to get shot doesn't count.

There should be a strong prior for widespread support of the regime in charge. We also have the fact that they're Muslims subject to a Muslim regime, and everywhere else in the Gulf, the leaders are actually considerably LESS strict about their religion than the people. We have the various "Death to America" rallies over the years, and the massive public funeral of General Solemani a few years ago. And of course what they don't have -- any real unrest. There's some protests, but they never do anything but soak up bullets. Even if they're not armed, where's the arson and window-breaking, the rocks thrown at police? Even Palestinians can manage that much. Even now, with the regime subject to death from above, there's no indication of popular revolt.

The picture to me is of a people who overwhelmingly support their government, and a few malcontents who go out and protest, sort of cargo-culting Western protestors. And are surprised when they get shot instead of things actually changing.

There should be a strong prior for widespread support of the regime in charge.

Why?

Most authoritarian states exist without widespread support. They exist with widespread acceptance / tolerance / fear of consequences if they actively oppose. I suppose we could claim passive acceptance as widespread support, but that's not how many people use the term.

Government rallies and government funerals are extremely weak indicators of popular support. It's the classic conflation of proportional versus absolute numbers issue, further complicated by the resources of a state to pay for pageantry and attendance.

Even if they're not armed, where's the arson and window-breaking, the rocks thrown at police? Even Palestinians can manage that much.

That was about 2-3 months ago. Understandable to have forgotten. It's not like the even the Hamas-Palestinians are doing much different after their own recent, uh, bad time.

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