site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4d ago (text post)   17285 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 15, 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.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What about the nation whose nuclear program Trump claimed to have destroyed, whose civilization he threatened to extinguish who he's now backing down to and paying and helping maintain the efficacy of their proxy and basically making it clear that blackmailing the world via the strait is now a-okay? Their cock isn't in his mouth?

Question: what's to stop Hezbollah from taking a breather and going back to shelling Israel and demanding nothing be done lest their ally close the strait again? Who'd be to blame then?

Not really part of the question here. How we got here and what decisions Trump made are kind of irrelevant. At some point it's the stated policy of the POTUS and to allow a putative ally to undermine that policy isn't acceptable if they want to remain an ally.

because Israel makes some noises via their most demented minister Israel is cucking the United States?

Israel isn't just making noises. They're continuing the war in Lebanon and stating that they intend to continue the war in Lebanon regardless of its impact on the stated policy goals of the USA.

They're continuing the war in Lebanon and stating that they intend to continue the war in Lebanon regardless of its impact on the stated policy goals of the USA.

They are obviously lying. Israel had excuses to invade Lebanon since forever, and it seems very likely that the Hezbollah attacks which provoked the current excursion were in turn a response to the attacks on Iran.

Wrecking the peace talks is the real objective, not an unintentional side effect.

Not that this detracts from your point.

Not really part of the question here. How we got here and what decisions Trump made are kind of irrelevant.

Ridiculous. It has everything to do with it, and this sort of pivot into fake grievance due to actions people chose to take is not irrelevant.

No. It's really irrelevant to the relationships involved.

The President of the United States has made a decision, and for Israel to try to undermine that policy is to make itself an enemy of the United States. It doesn't matter if that policy is wrong or the result of bad decision making or even illegal under US law. Those are problems for the USA to work out on its own.

Either we are the alpha in this relationship or we aren't. It's embarrassing to me as an American if this is let pass. It doesn't matter if we're wrong, we've validly decided to be wrong.

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