site banner
PaperclipPerfector  11d ago (text post)   26629 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.

Just shooting for tribe affiliation would be wrong. This was with regards to Israel. So what I was proposing at what point does a Synagogue have actual ties to Israel and it’s not just affiliation?

It’s a good bet that a lot of the young adults visit Israel and probably did birth right tours. Highly likely many have dual citizenship. A reasonable bet their is backing of AIPAC which has been Israel’s hammer to keep significant military aid flowing to Israel.

I think we could agree for a Muslim who had relatives killed by IDF that Sheldon Adelson would be an appropriate revenge target. The US obvious does drone strikes on people who raised funding and organization capital for terrorists.

It’s a good bet that a lot of the young adults visit Israel and probably did birth right tours.

By this standard, any Muslim who has ever visited Mecca is fair game for assassination at the hands of someone who lost family in 9/11. Is that the standard you endorse?

Mecca is a religious site

Israel is a colonial state - I like Israel but it is fundamentally a colonial state founded by Europeans replacing the local population

Don’t get me wrong Israel does have religious significance, but a modern Jew is like 50% Italian.

So in your opinion, anyone who visits Israel for any reason thereby becomes fair game for assassination by terrorists, in perpetuity?

I like Israel

I find that very hard to believe.

It’s an active war. The Normans first invaded Ireland in 1169. A final peace didn’t occur until 1998. So I guess these things can go on for a very long time.

If you want to conquer land….probably better to just do genocide so the natives don’t fight you for centuries.

I'll ask again: is it your contention that anyone who visits Israel for any reason thereby becomes fair game for assassination, in perpetuity? Is that what you believe, yes or no?

Historically that is the way the world works. Spain spent centuries on the reconquista. Norman’s with the Irish. Jews with reclaiming Israel.

People hold very long term memories on their homeland.

I don’t make the rules. It’s just history. Israel was dumb to not kill them all early.

To clarify. By members of the conflict.

I’m Irish. We spent 800 years killing Englishmen. Instead of being Roman slaves and whores we committed suicide. So I know a thing or too about being stubborn. But we still have a homeland.

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