site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2d ago (text post)   6561 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 6, 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.

Big if true.

I’m not going to jump on the hate train, since it’s firmly “too good to check” for a lot of people. Plus, you know, completely unverifiable. But assuming it’s true, this guy ought to be unelectable.

For those suggesting a ratfuck: do they actually have time to pivot, or is this basically tanking the whole party’s chances for Maine? Would that really be worth keeping a center-left populist out of office?

If he drops out of the race before July 13th, the Democrat Party of Maine gets to pick a replacement, which would almost certainly be the sitting governor that Platner beat for the nomination by default after she stopped campaigning.

That's why the Reps have been heavily hinting that they have killshot levels of dirt that only come out after it's too late to replace him.

If they're lying, and Collins just baited the Dem establishment, it would be a legendary act of dirty politics.

The true ratfucking would be to dump this the day after the filing deadline. This is the Democrats defending themselves from the upcoming Republican oppo research dump.

Nate Silver suggests it might be this guy:

Traders at prediction markets think it is very likely that Platner will drop out. As of Monday evening, they give Platner just a 3 percent chance of being the next U.S. Senator from Maine. After Collins, at 37 percent, the next-most-likely election winner is Troy Jackson, at 34 percent. (Jackson, a progressive Democrat, came in third in Maine’s recent gubernatorial primary.) Under Maine law, Platner has until next Monday (July 13) at 5 p.m. to withdraw from the race. The Maine Democratic Party would then have two weeks (until July 27) to replace him with a new nominee.

If it’s not a ratfuck, they will let Platner pick a successor. He did win the primary after all.

What? If it’s genuine, why would they do that? He can only drag down his replacement.

And so long as he denies it, what incentive would he have to help out?

Because he won the primary. He creamed the establishment candidate. She didn’t even make it to Election Day.

Presumably his political opinions are genuine. If he’s forced to quit (which he will be) he should quit on his own terms.

Maybe I was unclear.

The accusation represents new information unavailable to primary voters.

If that’s not enough to lose the general, they don’t need to drop him like this.

If it is enough, then his endorsement is worth less than nothing.

Therefore, they have no reason to drop him but keep asking him for input.

Okay, let me break this down.

  • Maine voters like Graham Platner’s politics and affect.

  • Maine voters do not like that Graham Platner is “consensually careless”.

  • Graham Platner would choose his endorsement based on alignment with his politics but not alignment on date rape.

  • Therefore, Graham Platner should get to choose his replacement.

But what if Graham Platner would in fact choose his endorsement based on alignment with date rape but not alignment with his politics?

Well then he wouldn’t drop out. No one is better positioned to make date rape mainstream than Graham Platner.

I see where you’re coming from, and I guess I’m just not convinced that the average voter decouples those two things.

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