site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3d ago (text post)   10349 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 8, 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.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What many Americans fail to understand about most major Western European cities (ie not Belfast) is that the battle has been lost a long time ago. In Paris, London, Brussels and in many tier two cities in these countries (Birmingham, Marseille, Rotterdam), natives are far below 50% of the population, and most of those who remain are old. My personal calculation is that perhaps as little as 20-25% of London’s young male population (unless you stretch to include outer, outer suburbs practically in Essex) is wholly indigenous, maybe the bottom end of that range. Other major cities like Vienna, Malmo, Frankfurt, Berlin, Lyon, even Geneva and Zurich are not too far behind.

You can’t start a revolt with those demographics. In fact other than the sectarian history, the reason these riots are happening in Belfast and didn’t happen in London after eg Lee Rigby is precisely because even then the demographics just didn’t exist to riot. The only riots in the last 20 years in London were the largely immigrant ones in 2011.

One hundred and fifty Britons held back three thousand Africans at Rorke's Drift. Individual IQ matters in war. It could still be done, even at 3:1 odds, if only whites would wake up.

I mean, I get your point but, cowhide shields and spears vs carbines. Yes: industrialized warfare stomps down on tribal warriors. Race war fantasies aren't that though. And now days the tribal warriors have AKs and technicals. They aren't going to be as vulnerable as during those golden few decades in which colonial armies had modern guns and the natives had spears.

See here:

The Effectiveness of Rifle Fire Across Cultures by Kulak.

Long story short, even with the same guns the minds of the people using them count for a lot.

There's a pay wall. But anyways I assume it discusses Muslims literally not aiming and trusting Allah to guide their bullets. Which sounds incredible but supposedly enough Muslims have said it so it may be true.

There's a pay wall.

Open Seame.

Thanks. Also that's much better than I would have thought.

It's not war, it's low-level ethnic conflict (serious warfare risks drawing in state employees pushed to stop it who're probably going to be more competent than random Sudanese people)

The recent Southport riots have shown that a lot of people just aren't that competent at rioting, the downsides of a comfy life. There's some reports that the Irish are doing better but I wouldn't draw too much on Twitter reports yet.

The recent Southport riots have shown that a lot of people just aren't that competent at rioting,

Please define "competent at rioting"?

by what metrics are we judging a rioter's proficiency? Property damage? Amount of favorable press coverage?

I'm thoroughly disappointed at rioters. At no point does anyone throw a bunch of water balloons filled with paint at the riot cops plastic faceplate/shields. The riot cops are allowed to establish a defensive line and use line tactics vs the rioters and the rioters never just drive a truck through them or use heavy truck/bulldozer equipment to blockade ingress points denying the authorities access with riot vans/water cannons.

‘Whatever happens, we have got The maxim gun, and they have not’

Rotor’s drift was a British victory because the British couldn’t retreat and had guns. The zulus lost a lot of people, but Isandlwana shows that they were highly effective at war.

Do you believe that the median Silicon Valley Tech-Bro has a higher IQ than the median 19th century Tommy? If so, do you believe that if the historical defenders were to be magically replaced with a randomly selected band of tech-bros, that the tech-bros would perform better than the Tommys did?

I think the more relevant way to look at the matter is whether there are important IQ floors below which substantial efficacy is lost. Replacing hard men with above-floor IQs with much softer men who happen to be even smarter wouldn't go great, I think, no. I also don't think it's especially pertinent to mention.

I think it is extremely pertinent.

There is a common assumption here on theMotte that a high verbal IQ is a direct proxy for knowledge, competence, virtue, grit, etc... and it is that assumption that I am challenging.

See @HereAndGone2's comment on "midwits" down thread.

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