site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   1575 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for March 29, 2026

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Looking for anti-woke books on parenting, preferably secular. How does raise children to not be woke? How does one teach them the gospel of success through hard work and mastery through practice? How does one handle the hypergamy question? How to balance tolerance with an appropriate level of caution around "inner-city youth"?

Is your goal primarily to

A) maximize the odds of raising a little Brett Kavanaugh or Amy Coney-Barrett

or

B) minimize the odds of your kid going off the woke deep end and turning into a little Robin DiAngelo or Viv Musk

Those goals are somewhat in tension. A lot of the most straightforward religious conservative figures I know were raised in very restrictive and ideologically indoctrinating households by domineering patriarchs, but so were a lot of the most off-the-deep-end wokies.

The bisexual onlyfans type girls I've dated, the absolute nightmare of the manosphere, were all universally the product of religious upbringings, often bundled off to Liberty or Oral Roberts after high school, and broke bad as soon as they were out from under daddy's thumb if not sooner. I know of precisely one trans kid from my high school circle, her parents stopped talking to my parents during the Bush administration because my parents were too liberal.

If you want to prevent your kids from being crazy wokescolds, don't take politics too seriously. Horseshoe theory: the opposite of the wokescold isn't the religious conservative, that's just a switch in valence. The opposite of the wokescold is the normie who shrugs and just kind of gets on with their life and ignores everything else going on around them.

If you seek to indoctrinate your kids via weekly Dread Jim readings, you're as likely to end up not talking to your gay son or blue haired thot daughter as you are to buy them a lot on your compound to raise your seven grandkids in the Truth. Don't overcommit, don't overpromise your ideology. So many religious conservatives tell their kids that everyone in the faith is good and everyone outside the faith is bad, this is so manifestly untrue that it is obliterated by contact with reality the moment the child steps outside the bubble.

not be woke

media which increases the positive valence of western culture at a young age (Little House on the Prarie), decreases positive valence of other cultures (old YouTube documentaries on foreign savagery), or makes fun of wokes (no idea where you’d find this, maybe there are some old cartoons out there )

gospel of success through hard work and mastery through practice

This is not real and this is also not a gospel. Why would you want them to internalize the unhappiness-generating myth that their personal effort leads to success, by which you mean income? There is no study that shows this. It’s a mix of genetic factors (personality, IQ, beauty, height), social factors outside one’s immediate control (where one is raised, early peer group), social factors in one’s immediate influence but unrelated to effort per se (networking), and luck. The notion that “hard work” is a toggleable feature in humans which has a role in their success may be a useful glue to keep poor people quiet and make the wealthy feel even prouder, but it is the least proven of all the possible factors of socioeconomic success. Terence Tao is a funny example of this mythmaking. He obviously loves math, he was raised to love it, he has the genetic features for it (including a likely +1 Racial Trait), and has a social life which revolves around math that administers all the right social reinforcements. He will tell you to work hard, but when you actually look at what that means, it involves only working when he wants to, and not working when he is tired or unmotivated. It’s, like, an hour of hard work followed by a nap and a pleasant stroll. And you look at his interviews and he has no stress while working and clearly loves it. But of course, when a person loves his work and its accompanying frustrations he often calls it “hard work”, even when the whole thing was pleasant and a preferable experience (even gamers and climbers do this). And it is the socially-ascribed way of taking about one’s productivity. Similarly you can look at Magnus Carlsen: little toggleable effort that he pressed to succeed, it’s in his DNA, and when truly stressful “hard work” actually became required to win competitions he gave up competing.

The notion that “hard work” is a toggleable feature in humans which has a role in their success may be a useful glue to keep poor people quiet and make the wealthy feel even prouder, but it is the least proven of all the possible factors of socioeconomic success.

I don't think you need a study to show this. Try:

  • entering a marathon, boxing tournament, or other physical contest without practicing
  • taking a test without any preparatory work or background knowledge
  • shooting in a rifle tournament without any prep

And see how you compare to people who put the work in.

Or take the time to speak to someone who's worked at a test prep center - contrary to what you might hear in the IQ reductionist space, test prep works (or at least that is what I have been told by someone in the biz). Similarly, look at professional classical musicians or Olympians: they don't succeed without practicing a lot.

Certainly there might be exceptions (savants, people with unnatural size and strength, etc.) but for most people your odds of success improve via hard work.

Magnus Carlsen

Isn't it correct that Carlsen's father was a chess fan who introduced him to the game at 5 and he's been competing since he was 8?

I definitely think that something like innate talent or genius matters, particularly around the tails, but if you can choose to be a person with an internal locus of control who believes in hard work you should prefer this as long as you can temper it with the understanding that there is not a linear connection between hard work and success.

Deliberate practice is the necessary condition for success across domains, but there’s no compelling evidence that activating “hard work” (in contrast to simply work) is a key determinant in performance. When you squint at what an elite performer means by hard work, you don’t often see a level of stress or endurance or extra care which a normal person would intuit is meant when they hear that they must “work hard” or “put more effort in”. They do not typically sustain a state of willful effort and instead there are just other factors involved. Even with SAT test prep, there are social and genetic factors which inform a person’s ability to sit down and study for long hours which seems totally uncorrelated to any manifestation of stress or vigilance or care which characterizes “harder work”. Those with the ability can sit in place for six hours with little stress; those without cannot, despite how hard they attempt it. (Usain Bolt eating 1000 chicken McNuggets in the week leading up to his Olympic Gold, where he turned around mid-win to smile always sticks out in my mind as an example of this).

there’s no compelling evidence that activating “hard work” (in contrast to simply work)

Okay. I'm not really sure we have any real difference of opinion here, since by "hard work" I don't necessarily mean "psychologically difficult." For instance, in my example above, Carlsen probably likes chess, people who shoot in rifle tournaments typically like shooting rifles, etc. But the truth remains that for lots of things (like, to use another one of my examples, test prep) people often don't like doing it, but they will be better off if they do.

When you squint at what an elite performer

I mean, I don't really know why the bar here is "elite performer." The OP said he wanted his kids to learn about achieving success through hard work. He didn't say "I want my kids to learn that through hard work they could achieve anything they want."

Usain Bolt is at an extreme tail and we shouldn't teach our kids to emulate him (at least not specifically, unless they also show extremely rare promise as athletes). I want my kids to be able to sit down and do test prep (even if they don't want to) to get a better grade than the one they could already have gotten. I don't particularly care if they are a world-class marathon runner.

The contention is that:

  • being inclined towards hard work
  • being able to sustain doing hard work
  • being able to get an output from that hard work that justifies it

are not actually factors under your control. In short you cannot "choose to be a person with an internal locus of control who believes in hard work". You are or you aren't, depending on genetics and early life and other stuff that you can't toggle on and off.

Not entirely sure this is true, I've veered both ways.

The OP is specifically asking for advice on how to influence someone's early life, so (in theory) even if it's entirely correct that 100% of one's ability to do hard work is unchosen, OP could still succeed at giving his kids the ability to do hard work.

I think, intuitively, that it is common sense that you can choose to work hard, at least to a limited degree. I think most people have the experience of buckling down on an important or time-sensitive project, and easing up or even slacking off when things are less urgent (or when there's less external pressure), even if there's still work to be done. And so if you conceptualize "working hard" as choosing to buckle down relatively more and ease up relatively less, I think it's hard to argue that you can't "choose to work hard."

The question of whether or not choosing to do that consistently pays off commensurate to the effort is a much more interesting one and I think sort of depends on your goals. But it seems fairly clear that below a certain threshold of hard work (failing to study at all, to show up to work, etc.) you will suffer. And I think above a certain threshold of hard work, you will probably suffer too (if for no other reason than you need to sleep!)

Anti-anything is a bad way to raise children. Pro-something is a better.

How does one handle the hypergamy question?

In my experience, lead by example. In my extended family, a cousin's likelihood to stay in committed relationships is directly related to the health of their parent's marriage.

How to balance tolerance with an appropriate level of caution around "inner-city youth"?

Exposure. Take them around the city. Let them see the city. They'll start pattern matching. The most sheltered are the most delusional.

gospel of success through hard work and mastery through practice?

Set up increasingly demanding loops of challenge -> struggle -> gratification.

At a personal level, figure out if you want to indoctrinate your kids with your opinion or give them the tools to form their own.

Nature abhors a vacuum. Instead of deciding what your child will not be, decide what you want your child to be. This is endorsed by the bible and common sense, but it also means that you can pick parenting books based on what you want for your child- that should help you pick one.

Like stock investing, raising children not to be woke and/or shielding them from the hustle and bustle of the urban youth is likely better done passively instead of actively. So more choosing the right place to live and leading by example, less John Derbyshire speeches and reciting FBI crime statistics before dinner every night.

  • While not as highly heritable as height or IQ, political views are still fairly heritable, so if you and your wife are naturally chuddy yourselves a lot of the work may already be done.

  • Live in countries, regions, and/or neighborhoods with few low information voters and with minimal lunchtime rowdiness. Aspiring rappers and Michael Jackson impersonators cannot culturally enrich your children where they can’t reach them. Normies think and refer to this as living in an area with a good school district. House prices discriminate so you don’t have to.

  • Similarly, live in countries, regions, and/or neighborhoods with limited wokeness. One way better-off Western families can accomplish this is by living in a non-Western country and sending their children to international schools. It can be a good solution if one has overseas family, especially after fat- or chubby-FIREing. While some teachers may be woke if they're Westerners or Western-influenced, at least your kids' classmates families' would less likely to be.

After wife and living location have been picked:

  • Make friends with other households where the husband is a crime-thinker too, and your families can hang out. Your families can be a positive reinforcers for each other.

  • Spend time with extended family starting from when the kids are babies. It's more difficult to believe in blank slatism when you can see how much more similar your nuclear family is to your extended family, and your extended family is to everyone else. While it may vary depending on one's circumstances, spending time with extended family is also good in and of itself.

  • Abstain from movies and TV shows that serve as girlboss and/or non-Asian minority propaganda. This might mean abstaining from most Hollywood products, but addition by subtraction.

  • If you watch sports in the house, keep it to the NHL and maybe MLB instead of the NBA or NFL. Don’t be one of those fathers who fawns over Ngubu scoring some fackin goals.

  • Be a man unapologetic of who you are. Maintain your physical and psychological strength even if life can be all_so_tiresome.jpg. Demonstrate the principles of sexual dimorphism and hypergamy through leading by example.

Regardless of what you do, for the foreseeable future daughters are more likely than sons to follow the Cathedral’s doctrine and simp for alphabet and racial minorities, eventually do stuff like post rainbows and black squares, vote for more third world immigration and wealth redistribution. As teenage girls and young women, many daughters learn that what they want can just be given to them, thus creating a disconnect between hard work and success.

There is likely greater potential for a treatment effect when it comes to boys, as they tend to be more open to crime-think in the first place and there are more developmental/environmental pathways for boys to gain exposure to chuddiness and the connection between hard work and success:

  • Get your boy(s) into weightlifting as a teenager. He can see his physique progress with work, and it's harder to believe in gender egalitarianism when the mirror and Lived Experience illustrate otherwise.

  • Think of the team sports the modal Reddit woman would seethe at for being too pale, too fratty, and/or too toxically masculine, such as lacrosse or hockey. Have your boy(s) join a team, or multiple of them, so he can grow in his journey with other chuds-to-be.

  • Play sports with your boy(s) starting from when they’re young. Just playing with them will help with their development so they can make the more elite toxically masculine sports teams (no need to get all tiger dad). Plus, it’ll make for fond memories. They can also see the ability gap narrow between them and their old man over time (hopefully not due to decline of the latter).

A lot of the above also has a virtuous cycle. For example, if your son plays a chuddy sport, you can meet other chuddy fathers and your families can hang out.

I have never met an international school kid who isn’t a turbolib. Half your suggestions are about shielding the kid from the racial underclasses, not from wokeness which is the English speaking world’s current elite ideology. You cannot shield from it by coming closer to the educated elite.

I have to say, this list has gotta be one of the textbook examples of Arson, Murder and Jaywalking.

"Be an example of a strong, non-feminine man... check... family values... check... and no matter what you do, don't let them see a nigger ball. They might just think he's actually better at something!"

Once bitten, twice shy; is there a way to engineer scenarios where they get bullied or otherwise mistreated by diverse and inclusive wokescolds?

Most of the advice given in this thread seems like a pretty good way to accomplish that.

Reality check: You can stand against society alone, but to raise kids, as one wise stateswoman said, you need a village.

Your kids need peer group of people with the same beliefs who will stand with them and support them.

Otherwise, it is just all media, school and society telling them W, while dad alone is rambling non-W. Why should they follow the old dodgering dodger?

Just one sad example: case of Adrienne Black.

Born as Don Black in racist family and raised as racist. Not some Klansman primitive, but devoted scientific HBDIQ aware racist. Little Don knew his IQ tables and bell curves as soon as he learned to read.

Dad was prominent white supremacist and Internet pioneer.

He did everything he could to raise Junior in racism and white supremacy.

And all his efforts were undone on New College of Florida by power of Jewish friendship and love.

In May 2013, Black started to befriend several Jewish people on campus, and gradually realized that her own beliefs were wrong after attending multiple Friday night dinners with Jewish friends.

Little Don knew his IQ tables and bell curves as soon as he learned to read.

Well, knowing group average IQ scores might prime someone to be favourable to Jews.

To tell the truth, maybe one white supremacist called Black would be spared the law of nominative determinism. An entire dynasty of black-hating Blacks, though?

Comedy is prophecy

I find that rather wholesome, even if it would be too unrealistic for a TV movie. “That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.”

Normally I would too, but...

- Remember son, never trust the Jews!
- You know nothing, father! I've made lots of Jewish friends this year, they're nothing like you say.
- Oh god, Donny, what have you done?!
- My name is Adrianna now!

Is not the most fortunate look.

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree here, provided you have the right (meta) frame of reference.

In this case, witness the results of genetics predicting a higher likelihood of "latching hard onto the dominant counter-cultural-but-actually-not-really social issue of the day and holding onto it throughout the rest of one's life".

In the '70s, that narrative was white supremacy; in the modern day (late '10s), that narrative is gyno/trans supremacy.

I guess if you really drill your kids in bell curves they start to wonder why they'd believe their dad (midwit gentile European) instead of their Jewish friends (+1SD Ashkenazim). Then the whole edifice falls down.

Be careful what you wish for!

Raising non-woke kids is probably easy. The question is how do you turn them into non-woke adults through the teenage years of thinking mom and dad are stupid. Bryan Caplan seems to have managed it.

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