site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5d ago (text post)   20114 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 20, 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.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The US will be increasingly black, and it's not as if black people will choose to enslave their own tribe

The transatlantic slave trade was largely Africans enslaving other Africans then selling those slaves to Europeans for transport.

Yes, true. But the culture of preindustrialized African societies is not the same as US blacks. Unless you are thinking that the propensity to enslave is genetic, rather than sociocultural, economic, and political opportunism. From the perspective of the Africans selling slaves back then, they were mostly selling the populations of rival tribes who were enemies. The romans enslaved the gauls, and they probably had a similar skin tone too. Selling off slaves of enemy populations was both profitable and weakened them in potential future conflicts. It was a good idea to sell them to distant strangers if possible, so the slaves would be unlikely to return for revenge.

So, the colonial age Africans who sold rival Africans were just doing what all of warring humanity had always done until the modern age. It does not mean US blacks will be more likely than average to sell other US blacks into slavery.

I don't think anyone is bringing back chattel slavery, since the economic conditions that made it useful no longer exist. The closest thing we have to modern chattel slavery, human trafficking, is mostly same race people victimizing each other. I don't think any US race is interested in enslaving any other race; it follows that the relative population of whites vs blacks is irrelevant to slavery in modern terms.

Somehow the question of who evil whitey was buying the slaves from gets forgotten. For example, Biden’s apology to African leaders for America’s “original sin” of slavery. One summary made by wrongthinkers: “sorry for buying what you were selling.”

I've concluded that most people think Americans caught them in Africa with big butterfly nets.

Well, it's fair to say the original sin of slavery is probably held by any large states that exist today, and thus indirectly by all modern populations except maybe the tiny islanders like the Sentinelese. Rome, Chinese dynasties, pretty much everywhere that won wars used some form of slavery.

America's slavery was in more recent memory and the ex-slaves have not fully genetically mixed into the descendants. Also Biden wanted to score some points with his voting base, so that was just tossing red meat (blue meat?) to the base.

Other than that, the justification for slavery, uplifting from barbarism, is bad from a modern Christian perspective. So a constant Christian apology must be given for the original sin of the past. The apologies will continue until the US is gone or until all of the US could be considered black.

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