site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 27, 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
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Drones defeat guns.

No, they don't. Guns are effectively a very specialized kind of drone, and the specialization they're good at hasn't gone away. It would be more accurate to say that guns defeat soldiers, but even this is highly contextual so long as we intend to keep having lots of humans around.

You can have a human operated machine gun and you will lose to a drone.

Maybe someday, certainly not yet.

But we probably? can not let people own fleets of AI controlled drones.

You probably won't be able to stop them from owning these for roughly the same reasons you can't actually meaningfully control guns if the public wants them.

The backdoor they have on your electric car will get turned off when you resist.

Okay. Why are illegal narcotics still a problem?

Technology and the ability to have industrial and post-industrial society has always been an issue the American Democracy and Freedom project.

It is, but for exactly the opposite of the reasons you're thinking. Too much order is probably not the basic problem you should be worrying about. I'm not worried that Wokes or whoever are going to establish a permanent tyranny. I'm much more worried they're going to try, and the way they fail is going to have my kids dead or reduced to eating cat food.

From a more general legal perspective, the point of gun cases is not to secure redress from the government, but rather to build common knowledge that the government is incapable of providing such redress.