site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3d ago (text post)   12174 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.

To all the Adam Smiths of the world. Why is having an ethnostate good for the jews but not anyone else?

Easy to answer from liberal perspective, no doublethink needed.

LIBERAL IRON ZION MODE ON:

Ethnostate for Jews is tragic necessity in order to survive, not something desirable in itself. Israeli situation is unique in the world. Immigrants in our countries are people who are fleeing mortal danger and desperate conditions, and by their hard work make economy stronger and life better. Do you want the line to go up, don't you?

Palestinians are not like that, Palestinians are hardened blood drenched terrorists, all of them are taught to hate and kill since the earliest age. Palestinians do not want peace, they want to blow up themselves and cut off heads (while your new Latino neighbor dreams about cutting your lawn).

Under no modern liberal definition is the direct continuation of distinct ethnic groups genetic lineage necessary. Jeet and Muhammed can be trusted to carry out your traditions just fine.

Palestinians are not like that

This is just low brow racism. If you can teach them to hate you can teach them to love. Israel needs to open its borders, but most necessarily Israelis need to open their hearts.

How will we make that happen? As the morally good, we will implement desegregation and forcibly integrate the schools at gun point if need be. You will also share prisons overcrowded with Palestinians who will rape and torture you to death because it makes them feel happy but we won't make a big deal out of it or change anything because segregation and apartheid is the greater moral evil.

We will create media that promotes ethnic grievance directed against you to remind everyone of your physical and moral crimes. We will make media about how morally good and righteous Palestinians are. We will make media about how Palestinian men and jewish women are romantically made for one another. We will make vague pseudo-scientific genetic arguments about hybrid vigor and how mixed babies are superior. We will make pornography specifically depicting the act of copulation between the two ethnic groups and make it de facto accessible to children.

We will be lenient on Palestinian criminals who rape jewish women and children and outlaw media that tries to highlight or speak against this. And we will at every turn promote the idea that this is morally good, brag about the fact that we've done this and proclaim that any jew who thinks otherwise is a malignant tumor besieging society that must be ostracized, forcibly reeducated or otherwise destroyed. It's also actually a mental illness to believe any of this is happening, or that it's bad, planned or that you don't deserve it.

You fail the liberal test. Ms. Greddle would like to have a word with you after class.

We will make media about how Palestinian men and jewish women are romantically made for one another.

Why can't right-wingers talk about anything without bringing their anxieties about black dick into it?

I think a more interesting and expository question is why the left can't bring their own anxieties about black dick into anything.

From 1800 to 1919 there was a negligible amount of violence against Jews in Palestine while they comprised 4-12% of the population. There was probably more anti-Catholic of anti-Irish violence in America than anti-Jewish violence by Arabs in Palestine at this time. What got them all worked up was when International Jewry (in this case a legible entity) started seriously planning to settle en masse to Palestine and create a sovereign state there, and started doing so with foreign funding, etc. And their response to this was, if anything, an under-reaction to the threat that this movement posed to their homeland, in retrospect. Had they disposed of the foreigners immediately, they would still have their homeland. It’s weird that people look at what happened to Palestine and conclude “if only the Palestinians were more welcoming neighbors”! No, the plans for colonization and expansion were already in place before the various casus belli for cleansing happened.

It still seems pretty contradictory to me. In particular this:

Immigrants in our countries are people who are fleeing mortal danger and desperate conditions

and this:

Palestinians are hardened blood drenched terrorists, all of them are taught to hate and kill since the earliest age.

Are the same picture. I suppose you could some "desperate conditions" are economic in nature, but a lot of the immigrants being shipped to Europe were/are from active war zones, with a culture and mentality bit that different from the Palestinian one.

Also when it comes to survival, I'd say the Jews as a coherent group have more years ahead of them then either of the Balts. And it's not even a factual disagreement, liberals usually just shrug at the prospect of any European-descended group being dissolved. It's seems to be a values disagreement, where they only care about one group surviving, despite their pretense of having universalist principles.

And it's not even a factual disagreement, liberals usually just shrug at the prospect of any European-descended group being dissolved.

LIBERAL IRON MODE ON:

If European groups are "dissolving" it is due to their free choice, not genocide. There are no concentration camps and mass graves in Europe. If Latvian does not want to be Latvian any more, this is his right.

And we are all for free choice, aren't we? (except choice to be bigot and hater, freedom to end freedom is no freedom at all)

If you support freedom, you would protect man from being murdered, while also protecting his option to access Canadian style health care if in the future he decided he is tired of life.

My sports car. Our credit card debt.

but a lot of the immigrants being shipped to Europe were/are from active war zones, with a culture and mentality bit that different from the Palestinian one.

Not a problem for an American then?

Who's building all those mosques on Texas, and electing Mamdanis?

Mamdani isn’t exactly a believing Muslim and won on a dsa platform by promising free shit. Hardly a ‘Muslim’ story.

He and his wife are hardcore anti-Israel and sympathized with 10/7, which helped a lot with the Muslim story.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but... are you sure? Being duplicitous isn't disqualifying for communists, and communists and Islamists alike share an interest in the destruction of the nation. Personally, I think it's likely that Mamdani is just keeping his Muslim status on the down-low.

Judging from what I see reposted about Mamdani, he could be elected solely by white atheist socialist-adjacents.

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