site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2d ago (text post)   10806 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 29, 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.

It's worth pointing out that there was originally a non-partisan body operating under the name "America 250" created in 2016 to oversee the celebration. The process for creating the commission was that the congressional leadership of both parties would each get to select an equal number of members, two from each branch of Congress and then eight private citizens. A bunch of non-voting members were added in 2020. Obama and Bush are both honorary co-chairs. Of the $150 million appropriated for America250 they received $25 million, much of the rest was then routed to Freedom250, an organization headed by Trump and Vance and consisting of members they appoint.

I think that's important context for why Shapiro found a plausible reason not to participate.

Of the $150 million appropriated for America250

That's... not quite the congressional authorization:

"SEC. 50305.

CELEBRATING AMERICA’S 250TH ANNIVERSARY.

In addition to amounts otherwise available, there is appropriated to the Secretary of the Interior (acting through the Director of the National Park Service) for fiscal year 2025, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $150,000,000 for events, celebrations, and activities surrounding the observance and commemoration of the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States, to remain available through fiscal year 2028."

Okay. I still think "Trump took advantage of a broadly worded congressional funding bill to defund a bipartisan commission and fund his own organization instead in a way that was completely legal" is still important context for why Shapiro also found a completely legal pretext not to participate. The whole reason Congress created a studiously bipartisan planning commission is that if you want broad bipartisan buy in for such an event, you need bipartisan planning to assure everyone of neutrality. Trump broke from this arrangement and Shapiro's response is the predictable tit for tat.

It was obvious by January of this year that committee had no plans to do much of anything at all.

They're throwing a free concert series around the country (because most people can't travel to D.C.). The biggest one is in LA with Smashing Pumpkins and Chris Stapleton. My guess is that will be better attended than when Kash Patel's Girlfriend performs at the Freedom250 event.

That sounds like a totally unrealistic claim to me. Can you imagine this all-star lineup failing to deliver? They had important bipartisan Senators, Senators from the Bridge to Nowhere State and the Bakersfield-to-Fresno State, on board. They even had Kellyanne Conway to keep Trump happy. To me, this looks like a focused group practiced in relentless goal-driven executing, and they would have delivered us a wonderful celebration of patriotism and fireworks, maybe even multiple fireworks, up to a whole box of fireworks - look, these are busy people...

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