site banner

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.

4
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I do not buy your lack of comprehension.

If you had questions about what I meant or wanted to know what I meant, you could have asked me directly. Instead you constructed an uncharitable and inaccurate interpretation of my words and asserted them as fact. You do this because you are not interested in truth seeking or understanding, but "getting" people you dislike (me, in this case). You like to claim people said or believe things that fit your conception of them, in which you can comfortably slot them as "Enemy who has bad opinions" because that does not require honesty, civility, or respect, which are not things you value.

To be absolutely clear and direct, I did not say, did not mean, and do not believe " if you think the "Braveheart" narrative is likely to be true, and remain unmoved by official government statements, it's because you hate brown people."

You will stop asserting this.

You do this because you are not interested in truth seeking or understanding, but "getting" people you dislike (me, in this case).

Hopefully you don't think that of me, so...

I interpreted the post AF linked as saying "everyone on theMotte prejudged this incident according to their hatred of women, hoodlums and/or brown people, and no evidence will have any effect". The only element of that that's actually kinder than what AF read it to mean was that you didn't appear to be applying this to non-Mottizens, but clearly AF himself is one so I understand his annoyance.

Like, okay, if that's not what you meant, fine - and AF himself, in this chain, has not actually called you a liar or insisted that you did mean the thing you're denying, just noted twice that he legitimately thought your comment to mean what he originally stated. The only people who've called others liars in this chain are you and @TowardsPanna, and I think you're both wrong.

Cool that you get to read my mind (edit: and criticize another poster for doing that mere 15 minutes later!), but I don't get to do a straightforward reading of the words you actually wrote. I didn't ask questions, because to me it seemed obvious. I literally don't know how else am I supposed to interpret "A noble effort. But hopeless. The first thread already demonstrated that priors were set by who you hated most: (1) females; (2) young hoodlums who bullied you; (3) brown people." other than to mean that people in the first thread formed their opinion based on their hatred of females, young hoodlums who bullied them, or brown people. If you want to clarify, feel free.