site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   4597 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 3, 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.

Culture War yes/no? I'm not going to have a long post here, since I am more genuinely asking questions about how this is supposed to work, but: Mayor Mamdani's grocery stores. Good idea or disaster waiting to happen?

My own, very damn subjective, view on this is that they'll turn out to be a typical boondoggle/pork barrel project for NYC internal politics, and that most of whatever funding available will go on paying baksheesh to vested interests, giving reward positions to party loyalists placed in charge of administering the scheme, and once Mamdani is out of office, these places will shut up shop (literally) and be empty commercial sites that made no real difference in the long run.

This is even before we get into all the interesting and varied possibilities of fraud and gaming the system.

I see that he one of his administration announced the necessity for ID cards so non-NYC residents can't load up on cheap groceries, which would seem to indicate that he's they are not a total fools and do have some awareness of how things can go wrong, but also given the protesting about requiring ID for voting and how this places a disproportionate burden on marginalised communities, how will he square the circle of "this is to serve marginalised communities but also we want ID"? If the anti-ID lot claim that requiring ID will not, for example, prevent voter fraud then how can requiring ID prevent grocery fraud? People who can't manage to get a driver's licence will manage to get a "library card-esque" ID?

During a press conference unveiling the proposal, Mamdani was asked how the city would prevent shoppers from abusing the program or purchasing goods for resale. He referred the question to New York City Economic Development Corporation chief financial officer Jeanny Pak, who said officials wanted to "target New Yorkers" through "a library-card-esque system" while managing purchases.

Also I understand that these stores will be run by private operators and hoo-boy. Worst of both worlds? I think this article (from an Irish person) points out the problems there, and anyone who has worked in retail will have a good idea of the kinds of problems that will be faced: shoplifting, union jobs (with corresponding high wages and good conditions, which will drive up costs and require a ton of the city government pumping in funding) or minimum-wage jobs?, challenging IDs for non-native New Yorkers, people buying the cheap staples then reselling them (as with loose cigarettes), what if the marginalised communities don't want fruit and veg, they want cigarettes, booze, soda and chips? and the likes:

New York City Economic Development Corporation (“NYCEDC”), in collaboration with the City of New York (the “City”), is releasing a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) to retain one or more (up to a maximum of five) grocery store operators or other qualified firms, either independently or in teams (each, a “Respondent”), to operate one or more (up to a maximum of five) of NYCEDC’s upcoming “N.Y.C. Groceries” stores, one to be located in each of the five boroughs of New York City.

Successful Respondents will demonstrate an ability to handle the full range of operations involved in running a grocery store, such as product sourcing across departments (via existing wholesale contracts and primary relationships with wholesalers), merchandising, customer service, and staffing. NYCEDC prefers Respondents who can demonstrate experience opening grocery stores on quick timelines.

NYCEDC plans to select a Respondent(s) on the basis of factors stated in the RFP which include but are not limited to: experience operating grocery stores or other retail food businesses, quality of the proposal, and requests for subsidy.

I disagree with the article about this being stealth socialism, but I do agree that this is a vanity project that will not survive Mamdani's term in office. It probably would be better to encourage Aldi/Lidl to set up stores in these areas for their cheap staples proven model, and if they don't want to/can't get to set up in such places, I think it would be a good idea to consider why not and what that means for the state-run grocery stores:

Even if the stores can keep pace with demand, it won’t translate into a 30pc reduction in the weekly shop for those who use them, since all other goods in the store can be set at market prices. Expect private operators to set them just a notch above market prices to keep their margins up.

People like to talk about how shoplifting from big chain stores isn't really theft because insurance covers all that and they make millions in profit, but such big chains make those profits by ruthless pricing and enforcing economies of scale and using their clout to pressure suppliers for discounts. Unless it is going to be the likes of Walmart operating one city-owned grocery store in each borough (and why would they even bid for such small potatoes outfits?) then the enforced "30% below market prices" will have to be made up elsewhere, and that will most likely be on: minimum-wage staff, fewer staff, mark-ups on the other items that are not the mandated staples, and finding some way around the limitation on "no hot food, lottery tickets, alcohol or cigarettes". Maybe Aldi or Lidl will snap these up as opportunities to grow brand loyalty in these areas? I dunno!

We'll see how it works out. I'm not sanguine, but somebody tell me how this could work if done properly?

The way I see this going is for it to end up being a giant shoplifting subsidization scheme. If there's no profit motive, none of the employees or managers have any reason to care about shoplifting, and any politician who doesn't want to be seen as an alt-right fascist isn't going to want to crack down on it either. I expect the shelves to be emptied out by looters just brazenly and without even trying to hide it walking in, loading up bags, and walking out, leaving the store barren and useless until the next time it restocks. This is just going to be a massive welfare scheme that siphons taxes into the pockets of thieves.

If there's no profit motive, none of the employees or managers have any reason to care about shoplifting

None of the employees in any normal store have any reason to care about it, either, other than the threat of losing their jobs for not tackling it, which is unchanged here. Their wages aren't based on profits the store makes.

None of the employees in any normal store have any reason to care about it, either, other than the threat of losing their jobs for not tackling it, which is unchanged here.

It is changed, in the owner cares, the owner hires the manager presumably putting pressure on him to care. The problem with the public sector is that especially for people who don't live next to them, these issues are so diffuse voters don't care enough to vote across ideology. Until things get very very bad, at which point the solution can end up being the equivalent of a shock treatment. So the "manager" rarely gets pressure to care.

EDIT: Someone pointed out as a response elsewhere in the thread the operators of the store still would care about profitability, then in this case yeah, disregard my comment.

The usual defence of shoplifting is that stores price in shrinkage. So if the NYC city administration is going to be paying for all this, then the for-profit operators can just pass the costs of the shoplifting on to them. Certainly, if I were going to sign a contract for this, I'd be sure to load all or as much of the liability onto the city as I could get away with.

If stores price in shrinkage then that just means the shoplifter is stealing from their neighbor who does not shoplift and is paying 3% more because you are stealing.

Honestly seems worse to me. Better to steal from evil corp than your neighbor John. And economics would tend to indicate you are stealing from John.

Yes, all shoplifting is theft from the community. But that's a second order consequence, so it's functionally inscrutable High Arcana to the people who need to hear it.

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