site banner

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.

3
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What other standard do you intend to use then?

Why are you acting the 10 years never happened? Why are you acting like you haven't been linked specific examples from which the standard is absolutely clear? Why are you doing so specifically after you explicitly defended firing people for edgy jokes?

I don't mind you defending a different position, but again, who do you think you are fooling?

There's been a minor news story recently after a teacher got well over a million bucks in settlement money, and there's a strong argument she shouldn't have gotten fired originally...

Government.

But what really gets me is the dog that doesn't bark. Nicholas Decker's "When Must We Kill Them" (answer: when he wanted the substack revenue) wasn't accompanied by an involuntary commitment and a warrant; PopeHat's complaining about a Bluesky ban rather than the solitary confinement and involuntary medication after he called for people to kill Musk.

Calls for government to do something.

Damore isn't independently wealthy; he got judges informing people the law required his speech be infringed.

Literally government.

William Kelly probably got his job back, and if he got anything else it was a rounding error, for 25 USD in Rittenhouse donations.

Government.

Notice something in common?

Why are you doing so specifically after you explicitly defended firing people for edgy jokes?

Private organizations are allowed to do that! Free speech is not the right to someone else's home or job offer! For example if someone tells you to leave their property cause you called their mom a whore, you get the fuck off their property. You have not been censored and your rights have not been violated, because you have no right to their property.

The first amendment is about government. If a private organization wants to trespass you for speech, they can. If they want to fire you for speech, they can. You do not have a right to seize and steal from others cause their response makes you feel sad about saying something.

What standard do you want to use that isn't demanding other private actors forfeit their freedoms?

Calls for government to do something.

No, noticing that the government did not do something that it happily did in other contexts.

Literally government.

Not only does California have a law requiring private businesses to recognize the free speech of their employees, and the NLRB require private businesses to recognize free speech rights about working conditions, the agency review held that federal anti-discrimination law instead required businesses be able to fire him.