site banner
PaperclipPerfector  6d ago (text post)   21020 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.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Iran war picks up again

The US said it launched a fresh wave of strikes on over 100 targets in Iran after Tehran struck a ship passing through the Strait of Hormuz, one month after the MOU to end the conflict.

Iran said it closed the waterway until further notice and warned of a severe response to US aggression. And within hours of the US strikes, Iran said they had hit a US base in Jordan, while the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain intercepted missiles and drones from Iran.

And Israel keeps striking southern Lebanon, despite the MOU.

Setting aside the many rounds of grifts talks, there's something to be said about great power adjacent warfare in 2026. Like Afghanistan and Ukraine, Iran is looking like this distinctive category of forever conflicts. Protracted, managed stalemates where neither side is willing to commit the resources and manpower towards a decisive victory, yet neither is prepared to accept political humiliation by surrendering. In Ukraine, Russia lacks the conventional strength for total conquest, while the West supplies enough aid to prevent collapse but not enough for a full on Ukrainian breakthrough.

I actually bought the last round of 'talks'. Now I'm blackpilled, we might be lucky if we get out of this in less than 20 years.

Despite Iran’s pronouncements that the straits are closed, many ships are continuing to cross them. We know that during the last closure the US military escorted many ships through (while maintaining a blockade on Iran itself). Iran it turns out doesn’t have the capability to actually close the straits, just to threaten to do so. Increasingly hollow threats as sanctions, the blockade, war inflation, and US strikes erode their ability to project even a little force.

Now even according to the New York Times, Iranian officials are divided because the Supreme Leader remains absent. Iran is apparently deeply divided on whether to continue the war or not — far from the situation predicted by war critics that Trump’s strikes would simply ensure Iran was united around fighting America until the bitter end.

this distinctive category of forever conflicts

This isn’t forever war, this is just war. The Iran War has only for a few months, most of that under ceasefire — this is totally historically normal. The Ukrainian War has stalled out but 4 years is also not an exceptional length by the standards of war. The major forever wars of recent years were America’s misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan, which were totally different models. Trump doesn’t have NGOs on the ground teaching Iranian clerics to embrace hashtag Black Girl Magic.

Now I'm blackpilled, we might be lucky if we get out of this in less than 20 years.

Iran won’t last that long. Inflation and sanctions are already crippling their economy and their ability to stay fed.

during the last closure the US military escorted many ships

The problem is that we don’t really know if this is true or not. The Admin has an interest in pretending that this is occurring, both to buffer the economy and sow confusion in Iran.

Iran is apparently deeply divided

We also don’t know if this is part of Iran’s negotiation tactic, allowing them to renege on previous promises while blaming it on a rogue faction, like how America can blame things on Israel while also having the ability to stop them at threat of force.

NGOs on the ground teaching Iranian clerics to embrace hashtag Black Girl Magic

This is not typically the criticism of our previous excursions, but that they cost trillions of dollars and led to many casualties and caused other problems down the road. All the black girl magic in the world likely did not exceed $100mil.

The problem is that we don’t really know if this is true or not. The Admin has an interest in pretending that this is occurring, both to buffer the economy and sow confusion in Iran.

Yes we do. Independent trackers commercial AIS and satellite images show ships crossing the strait. It’s not as many as before the war and it’s not zero. These are not unfalsifiable claims, a lot of this stuff is verifiable and public.

Moreover, who would these lies be intended to confuse? The Iranians? If Iran cannot even tell when ships are crossing the straits, then they do not have control over the straits. So even if we accept your premise as true, it’s not looking good for Iranian power.

The ships we see going through are for Iran-allied countries, eg China. I don’t think the US military would be escorting ships carrying oil for China.

The US has a blockade on. Ships are not passing through without American power. Your alternative explanation that we have to disbelieve everything coming out of America and accept Iran’s explanations instead is totally unconvincing.

https://x.com/CENTCOM/status/2059310640037269628?lang=en

It’s Iran and CENTCOM vs Trump admin. But Trump Admin is pretty much always lying. So why would you trust the Admin on this? Ships destined for China may be passing through without escort as part of an American-Chinese deal. Do you really think America would blockade things destined for China? How do you think China would reply to that?

CENTCOM five hours ago affirming that Iran does not control the strait:

https://x.com/centcom/status/2076278945993888116?s=46

Here is CENTCOM validating my earlier claim:

https://x.com/centcom/status/2075325424591044956?s=46

What you have posted is cherry-picked from a day when the US military was not actively safeguarding ships and used that as proof that they never did at all. (Which in fact that tweet in tacitly confirms as a real operation.)

The "earlier claim" tweet was written right after the MOU ended (june 17th to July 8th). Your OP assertion is "we know that during the last closure the US military escorted many ships through". The "since early May" in the CENTCOM tweet may be doing a lot of work here: do they mean that, technically speaking, between early May and until June 8th there were escorted ships, all of which occurred during the MOU phase? If they mean, as the phrase suggests (versus what it technically includes), that there were ships passing through in early May, this would go against CENTCOM’s May 26 post:

🚫CLAIM: Recent media reporting claims that the U.S. Navy has restarted escorting or assisting commercial vessels during transits through the Strait of Hormuz. FALSE.

✅TRUTH: Project Freedom has not resumed, and U.S. forces are not currently escorting commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz.

I mean, at least one of their posts must be misleading. They are correcting the claim that America is escorting ships (on May 26) with “project freedom has not resumed”. But project freedom stopped on May 5th. So this tweet suggests that from the 5th to at least the 26th, there were no escorted ships.

More comments

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