site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   24468 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 17, 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.

The problem with this is the electricity rate increases haven't actually materialized. They're all projections. And future impacts, in theory and in practice, fairly easy to avoid; the permitting authority has to structure things so the data center pays their own way. This should not be that hard, the data center builders currently have a lot of cash to throw around. So it amounts to a opposition talking point, like the water.

the permitting authority has to structure things so the data center pays their own way

'No, in fact, you do have to give us the tax break we demanded first, or else we will sue you into the ground'.

Good luck with that one Nybbler, so long as deep pockets can hire shark lawyers to tie things up in court for years.

Now, they do have the soothing messaging out about how they won't use water, drive up energy costs, will provide tons of jobs, etc. and I'd be more inclined to believe them if they hadn't first gone for "we'll sue you into the ground and destroy you and leave you penniless if you don't zone this land for a data centre".

A guy who assures me he was only joking about cutting my throat when he had the knife to my neck may be telling the truth, but he's not going to convince me he loved me and had my best interests at heart when he threatened to cut my throat.

"No, in fact, you do have to give us the tax break we demanded first, or else we will sue you into the ground."

The lawsuit documents indicate that the situation is more complicated than that. As alleged by the company:

(1) The company buys a bunch of farmland in an agricultural zone, and applies for "conditional rezoning" to a light industrial zone with special restrictions to prevent any industry other than a data center. Apparently, conditional rezoning is, not some unusual and onerous demand, but merely Michigan's equivalent to the "conditional use" or "special exception" that one might see in Pennsylvania or New Jersey.

(2) The municipal planning commission fails to make a legitimate consideration of the application, but merely recommends in an arbitrary and capricious manner that the municipal council reject it.

(3) The municipal council rejects the application by a vote of four to one. All five members participate in the vote, even though the chair previously recused himself from discussions on this topic due to a conflict of interest.

(4) The company sues the municipal govt., under state precedent that forbids "exclusionary zoning" of a use from land that is suitable for that use. The municipal govt. settles, agreeing to approve both the conditional rezoning and a 12-year "industrial development district" tax exemption.

(5) The municipal govt. approves the tax exemption, but then removes it, in what certainly seems like an obvious contravention of the lawsuit settlement.

That has nothing to do with this. Nybbler is saying ‘there is no need for data centres to use public electricity as long as the public authority lets them build generators’.

No, I'm not saying that, not in this subthread. It probably actually makes more sense for all concerned for them to use grid power and pay to have the capacity built and attached to the grid. This is going to make for a complicated arrangement but big deals often are. What I'm saying in this subthread is that data centers have not caused electricity rate increases.

Data centers can use locally generated power, but that's where you do get noise issues and local air quality issues. If the DC is going to use local power all the time (not just when the grid connection -- often multiple -- fails) the municipality needs to treat it as a power plant, which probably restricts a lot more where it can be built.

I see, sorry for misrepresenting you.

I work in energy (electricity) and this is part true and part untrue. Yes, electricity prices have gone up modestly, with bigger increases projected in the next 5 years.

The reasons prices are set to increase is that we are really slow to put new generation on the grid. And the amount of data centers under construction, let alone planned, is much bigger than what is already operational.

It’s a very simple supply and demand function. Load increases faster than supply. DCs buy power through PPA contracts directly with generators. But that crowds out offtake from the generators that would otherwise go to merchant markets or supply agreements with utilities.

We are average at best at building new power supply.

I expect retail electricity prices to be electoral politics by 2030, maybe even 2028.

This feels somewhat constrained to the local regulatory environment. We can just make investments in the grid faster. In the last two decades, total US nameplate capacity is up 20-30%, while ERCOT (Texas) is up over 100%. They don't want you to know this, but you can just build things: Texas is more friendly to renewables than California these days!

True in Texas. Not true in mid Atlantic and northeast. Sure we can just build things. We can also go to mars or cut Medicare and social security. But we’re not going to. For many many reasons.

And I’m not sure if you realize this, but increasing nameplate capacity 30% in 2 decades is absolutely awful.

And I’m not sure if you realize this, but increasing nameplate capacity 30% in 2 decades is absolutely awful.

That's fair, although IIRC per-capita consumption has declined (mostly through improvements in efficiency --- lighting, HVAC efficiency, better insulation, etc), so it's not quite as dire as it sounds.

But Abbot says there's too many applications for new power connections so he's not going to consider any of them. Brilliant move. Politically, anyway

I think Abbott is at least partially swaying with the political winds here, but ERCOT's 100% increase in the last two decades pales in comparison to their forecast of 300% growth in the next 6 years. I think there are probably legitimate questions of capacity buildout at much higher rates than baseline, and "not committing to anything further" doesn't sound entirely foolish.

On the third (gripping) hand, I really question the hyperscaler economic case where they're able to pay N times the current price for huge amounts of energy, but the proles will still have enough money to pay them for AI services and for utilities. I don't know about everyone else, but "paying to chat with Claude/Gemini/ChatGPT" falls pretty low on Maslow's heirarchy of needs for me, well behind "keep the lights on and HVAC going". Even if they expect B2B to pay the bills, consumers are still an important part (ultimately, the endpoint) of the economy: it can't be B2B all the way down. Models are getting more efficient and I somewhat expect that quite a few use cases need less hardware than currently forecast.

It's pretty obvious all of those DCs aren't going to be built, at least not any time soon (within the next few years); the hardware can't be built that fast and there isn't enough construction capacity. But a moratorium means you're doing none of them.

Existing electricity price increases aren't correlated to data center builds, however. And of course we're slow to put new generation on the grid; environmentalists.

Making datacenters build grid improvements is a real idea that's been floated around.

If you make them build grid improvements (which amounts to money and partnerships with existing firms which do such things; they're not going to do the actual grid improvements any more than Microsoft is restarting TMI), but don't LET them build grid improvements (because environment, safety, union work rules, etc), you've just banned them in a more complicated way.

But datacenters obviously will get built, even if people don't like it- tying grid improvements to them is the best way to make sure grid improvements actually happen.

Sure, and it makes perfect sense if someone wants to attach an enormous data center to your grid to do just that. However, the electricity complaints aren't the real objection any more than the water complaints are. It's just a nebulous NO with the specific complaints being the rationalizing faces of it, and so you can expect "making data centers build grid improvements" to come alongside "don't allow grid improvements" because the reason for such requirements is to block the datacenters.

But datacenters obviously will get built, even if people don't like it

I know plurality-voting representative democracy has a major sell-out problem, but there are still some limits on that problem.

It’s worse than environmentalists. If it was just that I’d have some hope. It’s the bureaucracy, regulation, cost disease, NIMBYism, and a general atrophy of industrial construction capacity.

Existing electricity price increases aren't correlated to data center builds

I don’t understand your point. Please elaborate. Evan assuming your point is accurate, I don’t think it matters.

You talked about how there has been no (little?) electricity price increase increase to date and that it’s only future price projections that have increased. I can assure you that when a power plant in 2026 is signing a 15-25 year power purchase agreement, those future energy price projections are the #1 thing they’re basing their price negotiations on. There’s a handful of companies that put out these projections and everyone makes long term financials decisions on them. The feedback loop on how these contracts affect the current price of power should be obvious, but I can elaborate if needed.

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