site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4d ago (text post)   16081 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 20, 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.

I've heard other center-lib influencers like Destiny outright acknowledge the hypocrisy, but they say it's OK because of the Holocaust- Israel should be an exception to the principles they claim to care about when it comes to promoting demographic change in Europe and the United States, and the Holocaust justifies that exception for Israel.

The other uncomfortable side of that equation- why is it bad for Europeans and Whites to oppose demographic change from mass migration? That also reduces to the Holocaust, so even though we face an apparent contradiction it is coherently derived from the same mythological foundation.

The Holocaust mythos is the center of this dialectic. Holding Jews and Gentiles to totally different standards is a core feature of that dialectic and is not even a contradiction even though it appears that way on the outside. This is the Moral Order.

...huh, I was starting to think you'd left the Motte entirely.

The thing is, once again you're attributing a kind of unique malice and hypocrisy to Israel even though, er, there are lots of ethno-states? Most countries are more like Israel than they are like the US, i.e. they consciously understand themselves to be the nation of a particular ethnic group. This isn't Jews and Gentiles held to different standards. This is the US, and to a slightly lesser extent Europe, being weird, and that weirdness originates, I'd argue, in the liberal revolutions of the late 18th century.

The Zionist malice is unique, no other ethnonationalist movement has such prominence in our cultural and political institutions. No other ethnonationalist movement tells us we are evil for not wanting to be demographically replaced by the third world, but we are morally obligated to support their own ethnonationalist project. The Japanese don't do that, the Chinese don't do that. The Russians try to stir up a lot of trouble but they don't do that. It's only Zionist Jews that advocate for mass immigration and anti-racism in the United States while demanding support for their own ethnonationalist project.

Take the ADL as Exhibit A of the behavior I'm describing.

Well, at least this time you're admitting openly that you think that Jews are malicious.

It seems to me that you're taking a large and common sensibility that is shared across most ethnic groups in the US - that the US is not and should not be an ethno-state - and then implausibly blaming that entirely on Jews/Zionists. The causality here is not at all clear. It's true that Jews generally support Israel, and Israel is an ethno-state, but they are far from unique in that light (that is, people in the US being positively-disposed to a foreign country that they share heritage with), and it's also unclear that there's any particularly strong correlation between 1) supporting Israel, and 2) wanting the US to not be an ethno-state.

I would point out, for instance, that group in America that hates Israel the most is also the group most opposed to the idea of the US as an ethno-state. Support for third-world immigration is surely highest on the left, especially the radical left, and those are the people who hate Israel most.

You claimed Zionism is not unique among ethnonationalist states, I claimed it is unique due to its long-standing political influence and domestic activism in the US that consciously created the moral dialectic that Adam Smith is appealing to in this conversation: it's bad for Whites to care about race, but we should support the Jewish ethnostate.

The causality here is not at all clear.

It would be totally impossible to trace the origin of Tolerance Education in the United States in any other direction. The Simon Wiesenthal Center was founded in 1977, which Wikipedia notes is known for Holocaust research and remembrance, hunting Nazi war criminals, combating antisemitism, tolerance education, defending Israel, and its Museum of Tolerance.

Wikipedia describes the origin of the center:

The founder Marvin Hier was born and raised in New York City and became an ordained rabbi at the Rabbi Jacob Joseph School. At the age of 22 he moved to Vancouver, Canada, and became the rabbi of the city's orthodox synagogue. He became friends with the mostly non-Orthodox Belzberg family who would help him fund the Simon Wiesenthal Center. In 1977, he moved to Los Angeles and bought a building on Pico Boulevard using a $500,000 donation from Samuel Belzberg which was matched with another half a million from Toronto-based real estate maven Joseph Tannenbaum. In the building he founded a yeshiva, a religious Jewish school, today known as the Yeshiva University High School of Los Angeles, and a small Holocaust museum, with Belzberg as founding chairman. Famous Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal was convinced to bless the museum with his name. Edward Norden, writing for Commentary, dismissed the museum as "a low-tech affair fashioned by and for Jews and holding nothing against the Gentiles back—an outsized portrait of Pius XII was given a prominent place among pictures of those who 'didn't care.' The message was that Jews have enemies, murderous enemies, and should look out." Hier, a skillful fundraiser, networked with the Hollywood célébrité, local politicians, and businessmen and raised large sums of money which he used to expand his operations.

"Tolerance Education" in schools today is practically synonymous with Holocaust education, the Holocaust mythos formulates the center of this liberal consensus that White nationalism is the greatest evil but Jewish nationalism is something we all have to support.

Likewise the ADL was founded in 1913 and incubated by the American Jewish Committee and American Jewish Congress. The well-known Museum of Tolerance was opened in 1993. Speaking of the American Jewish Committee:

American Jewish Committee (AJC) is a civil rights group and Jewish advocacy group established on November 11, 1906. It is one of the oldest Jewish advocacy organizations and, according to The New York Times, is "widely regarded as the dean of American Jewish organizations".

Besides working in favor of civil liberties for Jews, the organization has a history of fighting against forms of discrimination in the United States and working on behalf of social equality, such as filing an amicus brief in the May 1954 case of Brown v. Board of Education and participating in other events in the civil rights movement.

The causality is clear, over a century of Zionist organizations fighting White nationalism politically and culturally tooth and nail every step of the way, while simultaneously demanding unwavering support for Jewish nationalism. That is a unique malice.

The entire reason Krystal is so scandalized by the concept of the ethnostate is because she internalized her Tolerance Education!

The idea that the United States is not and should not be an ethno-state predates 1977.

The Simon Wiesenthal Centre is in no sense responsible for American civic nationalism. What on Earth are you talking about?

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