site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   24105 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 18, 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.

Then don't be old and don't work and save for decades. Live now and create. Society is gray when the economy is dominated by penny pinching sloggers and idle old people. Imagine creative young people investing and building and doing their best to still contribute something positive in their 60s while living off of some savings.

Then don't be old and don't work and save for decades. Live now and create

Naa, I'm tired. Besides, if I did, you and yours would be complaining about old people hogging all the good jobs.

Naa, I'm tired.

That sucks. I'm young people should not have to wait to live their life until they're tired all the time.

Then live your life. But your implied idea that people who have already worked and saved should be dispossessed and sent back to work (which, as I said, you'd complain about too) so young people don't have to... well, even if you could pull it off, it works for one generation only.

One quibble with this, in the US at least, the vast majority of retirement savings aren’t just sitting in banks, they’re tied up in the stock market, ie, invested and “building”. This is true for most old and/or wealthy peoples money, which is why the “they’re hoarding wealth” argument is kind of silly in some ways; this generational wealth isn’t sitting in some Scrooge McBoomer vault, it is the fuel that drives the market.

Fewer young men will take risks when they know the next generation will say "we don't owe you nothing, gramps".

Yes and a lot of the youth today are toiling under the expectation the vast panopoly of elderly welfare that currently exists will have a machete taken to it long before they get there.

The current clique got on the right side of medical advancements and shifts in lifestyles that enabled an extra 10 years of lifespan without the retirement setup adjusting far enough to keep the books balanced.

Yes and a lot of the youth today are toiling under the expectation the vast panopoly of elderly welfare that currently exists will have a machete taken to it long before they get there.

And this has been true since Gen X started working. I'm sure there have always been younger people who think the way to get ahead is to just to steal old people's stuff, but they're as wrong as evil now as they always have been.

There's two separate issues/lanes here. Some people are beneficiaries of public retirement spending at massive scale despite not actually self-funding their retirements and some are being accused of hoarding.

As a generational cohort it'd make sense for the elderly to do more to support each other via applying better means testing to program availability

There's two separate issues/lanes here. Some people are beneficiaries of public retirement spending at massive scale despite not actually self-funding their retirements and some are being accused of hoarding.

And between the two this covers pretty much every old person who worked.

No, they will take more risks because the future is more uncertain regardless of present actions when they're not getting a cushy OAP for having wrinkles.

A world where none of your choices can affect the stability of your life in the future sounds like something that will collapse after a generation in favor of the one that balances handouts to the young with UBI for the old.

No it doesn't. The smarter argument would have been „have you seen Africa?” My retort would be that the present economy is too sure in all the wrong ways so chaos would be an improvement. Then out of the rubble comes a well-ordered slow life history society, like Ancient Rome.

The old (specifically, old fathers) had ALL the power and wealth in Ancient Rome. It's a terrible example for your position.

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