site banner

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
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Whatever you call "let the high IQs work without taxes or competition with anyone they don't like", it's not "aristocracy" in any established meaning of the word. Aristocracy is not when you "get" to do things. Aristocracy is when you do things, while other people less versed in politics "get" to do what you allow them and no more.

Bemoaning that the world isn't fair because you only get to keep 100k/year instead of 200k/year is a useless and undignified activity.

Amazing how much "dignity" coincides with shutting up and accepting what your betters give you.

One's welcome to not accept it, and I wish him luck in getting more than what he's given. I just don't care for made-up justifications for why he "deserves" more than mere dregs of an upper middle class salary.

I just don't care for made-up justifications for why he "deserves" more than mere dregs of an upper middle class salary.

Why are you so bent out of shape about this? You don't always think so materially or amorally. For example, you said

I think that's silly. Universities should teach material, not create rat races. If too many of your students pass the material, teach harder material.

Here's how you-in-this-thread would reply to this:

Buddy, I've got some bad news for you. universities do create rat races. You're just mad you lost! I wish you luck in squeezing a little more out of the rat race some day, but it will take a lot of sweat, sacrifice, and hard work. And remember: you deserve nothing.

My oughts about higher education institutions are different than my oughts about the base structure of society. If you looked for my opinion on something that's even lower stakes, such as competitive gaming, you'd find that it doesn't align with my views on an ideal society either.

Yes but you acted like you don't understand the concept of ought in this thread. Apparently you do, and you turned it off when convenient.

I disagree with yours.

One could say that I observe a stable moral-aesthetic superposition between "the world should be fair!" and "the world is unfair, act like it". "The world should be unfair in my favor" is not a part of the superposition.

Sounds like equality is your only morality. You are struggling to conceive of morality outside of equality, the only other thing you can see is amorality.

Equality is not the same as fairness. I believe those who labor to better the world should be compensated. The potential men who could maybe better the world, but only if they feel like it and also if everyone stops getting in the way, should not be compensated for potential.

More comments