site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   7880 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 13, 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.

Trump deletes post depicting him as Jesus-like figure after backlash

Faced with growing backlash, US President Donald Trump appears to have removed a controversial Truth Social post depicting himself as a Jesus-like figure.

The AI-generated image, which showed Trump appearing to heal a sick man in a hospital bed, sparked fierce backlash from both sides of the US political spectrum, including from some of Trump's most ardent supporters. (...)

The now-deleted image showed Trump, wearing a white robe, with a glowing hand on the forehead of a sick man, which critics said was similar to religious paintings showing Jesus healing the infirm.

The background of the images included the Statue of Liberty, a large US flag fluttering, fighter jets and an eagle, as well as a nurse, a woman praying and what appeared to be a soldier in uniform. (...)

Criticism of the image came swiftly, including from figures considered close to Trump and the administration.

"This should be deleted immediately," wrote Sean Feucht, a Christian activist who is working on a series of faith-based events to mark the 250th anniversary of the US Declaration of Independence this year. (...)

Riley Gaines, a prominent conservative activist, wrote that "God shall not be mocked".

Much of the criticism also came from faith-based US news outlets.

"This goes too far. It crosses the line," wrote David Brody, a journalist with the Christian Broadcasting Network. "A supporter can back the mission and reject this."

If the image had been satirical, people would have dismissed it as too over the top. But Trump's taste is such that he posted this thing unironically.

Any Trump supporters care to steelman this? To me, the most parsimonious explanation is that Trump is a narcissist with a god complex.

the most parsimonious explanation is that Trump is a narcissist with a god complex

I'm a big Trump supporter. I concede that he has narcissistic tendencies although I don't know if he is diagnosible with anything. I would guess that the experience of being shot and completely avoiding serious harm due to fortuitous circumstances would exacerbate these tendencies in most people.

Anyway, I think it's pretty common for successful politicians to have personalities which lean towards the so-called "dark-triad" of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and sociopathy. Bill Clinton struck me as being at least somewhat sociopathic.

So my defense of Donald Trump is that sometimes the perfect is the enemy of the good. At the moment, there is a huge threat to the United States from Leftism, Progressivism, Wokeism, whatever you want to call it. The sort of people who hate America, hate white people, hate men, etc. The sort of people who will seize on any excuse to seriously oppress their perceived enemies. The sort of people who seriously think it's a good idea to put confused children through sex-change procedures. Donald Trump, generally speaking, opposes all that.

In my view the same character aspects that make Trump a gauche, offensive, tone-deaf goof are what allow him to say "I'm gonna bomb the shit out of them," "Grab em by the pussy," and on and on up to the repost of himself as a healing messiah-- but also to stand up defiantly to the crowd who is saying the (naked) Emperor's new clothes are fine and beautiful. He can and does reject out loud many of the progressive left points of faith, with no apologies. Whether he does this because he's old and isn't interested in adapting, is simply preaching to what sees as his support group, or has thought it all through, Motte-Style, and reached his own conclusions, I cannot say.

In usual terms we would say "He has no filter." Which in many, many cases is refreshing and admirable. His standing against transgender ideologues is probably the one issue I really have to respect him for (if respect is the right word). He has walked a more ambiguous line on race issues, but certainly doesn't mouth the pat opporessor and oppressed line of most of his antagonists. Etc.

I would normally say it took great courage in a politician to be so contrary so publicly, but he isn't really a politician in the sense I use the term, and I'm not sure courage is the right word (maybe fearlessness).

As for narcissism, let's remember it's just a word a bunch of "mental health professionals" agreed on how to define. He's definitely full of himself in an almost pampered child way, though he also has a resilience and toughness that allow him to withstand repeated verbal assaults on his character by everyone from the NYT to mainstream comedians to any rando who wants an easy butt to his joke, jibes about his appearance that would be deemed hateful if directed at anyone else, and at least one fast-moving bullet. This would have mentally crushed any normal (sane, if you like) person years ago. I hesitate to say anyone is one-of-a-kind but he's certainly close.

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