site banner
PaperclipPerfector  8d ago (text post)   23581 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 24, 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.

4
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Bloomberg: Goldman Says Gulf Oil Flows Two-Thirds of Prewar Level

Oil flows from the Persian Gulf have recovered to around two-thirds of pre-war levels, limiting the Iran war’s impact on global crude prices, according to Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

Total exports of crude and oil products from the region have risen to 15 million to 16 million barrels a day, helped by higher crossings through the Strait of Hormuz, Goldman analysts including Daan Struyven and Yulia Zhestkova Grigsby said in a note. That’s still 7 to 8 million barrels below pre-conflict levels, but well above a trough of 5 million to 6 million barrels a day in March, they said.

A lot of ships are still making the crossing dark with transponders turned off but the trend is clear. Iran’s (supposed) leverage over the strait is basically nullified, oil is passing through despite Iranian proclamations. Independent analysts now agree with what the US government was saying weeks ago, that millions of barrels are passing through the strait under American auspices.

US CENTCOM agrees, putting out this statement that the US has escorted a few thousand ships through the Gulf, carrying through three-quarters of a billion barrels of oil over the past few months.

What changed?

Axios: "That sucker is open": U.S. gains the upper hand in the battle for Hormuz

Zoom in: After the MOU fell apart, the military worked to reopen the strait unilaterally. The effort included several elements:

  • Together with the United Arab Emirates, a U.S. military task force started guiding ships through the southern channel of the strait while giving them air cover and intercepting Iranian drone and cruise missile attacks.

  • A two-week U.S. bombing campaign significantly undercut the IRGC's capacity to attack ships crossing the strait.

  • A mine-sweeping operation involved Navy divers, Navy SEALs, underwater and surface drones, and private contractors to detect and neutralize the mines.

  • A blockade of Iranian ports was restored.

The US has apparently de-mined the Straits of Hormuz, although, interestingly, there don’t seem to have been many mines in the first place!

More than 200 mine-like objects have been swept from the main lane of the strait. U.S. officials say only 11 of them were actual mines and just a few were properly deployed.

It seems as though Iran’s capacities to threaten ship traffic the Strait were severely degraded by US military action, but that Iran was successfully able to convince news reporters and insurance companies that it could target ships.

For instance, Brady Sullivan at CNBC says

As I reported on @CNBC over a month ago, shipowners told me many “mines” we decoys … some were actually just inflated trash bags ostensibly made to seem like Hormuz was swimming with mines.

Meanwhile, Reuters: Pipelines and ports: Iran war spurs Gulf infrastructure investment

DUBAI, Aug 28 (Reuters) - The Iran war's redrawing of the global trade map is forcing Gulf nations to retool their investment play book, ploughing capital into infrastructure, from energy pipelines to ports, to weather the fallout from the conflict.

The war has highlighted the Gulf's overreliance on the Strait of Hormuz, previously a chokepoint for 20% of global oil flows ‌but also subject for decades to Iranian threats of disruption.

Not only has Iran lost control over the Straits, but Gulf states are building new pipelines to reroute oil around the Straits so that Iran can never threaten them again.

And how does it look inside Iran?

WSJ: Labor Protests and Panic Buying Signal Growing Pressure in Iran

Iranians rushed to buy fuel and food this week, signaling mounting economic pressure as the Trump administration’s threat to tighten sanctions sparked fears of deeper shortages and pain.

Small demonstrations by labor unions—which had all but disappeared during the war—are popping up across the country. Oil workers, pensioners and teachers have gathered to complain about the declining currency and rising cost of living.

————

Some might remember Trump’s infamous comments on this subject some months ago:

Q. And what's your backup plan?

The President. Excuse?

Q. What's your backup plan if the—there's no deal to open the Strait?

The President. The—you don't need a backup plan. We have—the military is defeated. Their military is gone. They have—you know, we've degraded just about everything. They have very few missiles. They have very little manufacturing capability. We've hit them hard. Our military is amazing——

The Shakes take: Iran will never toll the straits, Iran will never have nuclear weapons, Trump was right about everything, a lot of people who believed Iranian claims are looking very, increasingly, increasingly!, foolish.

We are now two thirds of the way towards how things were prior to us attacking our enemy. None of this has benefitted a single American that is not a zionist. Total Victory!

None of this has benefitted a single American that is not a zionist.

Killing the "death to america" leader whose foreign policy was "export islamic revolution" seems prima facie to benefit me a lot

Not if he's instantly replaced by even more dedicated hardliners who believe the exact same thing.

Do they believe the exact same thing? It doesnt seem so to me. The IRGC strikes me as a military outfit before a religious one. Khomeni was primarily a cleric. Dealing with a military junta seems leagues better than an theocracy, even if they both hate america.

Meh. The IRGC and clerics are fairly interactive with one another, the former taking more dictation from the latter. I think the more basic point is that from Iran’s perspective, the geostrategic logic is the same regardless of who is in power; because that doesn’t alter the security dilemma you’re caught in.

Ok to engage in realpolitik / geostrategic logic the first assumption is that states are rational actors acting in their own self interest. I dont think khomeni was a rational actor, he was an islamic fundamtalist. I think the junta giving direction to the clerics would be a much better situation, if that is actually the case.

I dont think khomeni was a rational actor, he was an islamic fundamtalist.

What’s your evidence he wasn’t acting in their national self-interest?

What’s your evidence he wasn’t acting in their national self-interest?

I actually got Khamenei and Khomeini mixed up, but I don't think it changes much as they were both islamic fundamtalists who did stupid things.

Going back to Khomeini, the hostage crisis. Which Khamenei strongly supported. What did they get kidnapping a bunch of diplomats? They got to feel great sticking it to the great satan? What did they lose? They pissed off a superpower who then donated a bunch of military equipment to Iraq, a country that invaded them like a year after Iran pissed off its old superpower ally. To quote la wik:

The Iraqi invasion of Iran took place less than a year after the hostage-taking of American embassy employees in Tehran. According to journalist Stephen Kinzer, the rapid deterioration of American–Iranian relations, from close allies to hostile adversaries, emboldened Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein to launch the invasion. Kinzer further argues that the United States’ hostility toward Iran subsequently influenced its decision to support Iraq after the war began to turn against Hussein.[153] The United States supplied Iraq with, among other things, "helicopters and satellite intelligence that was used in selecting bombing targets." This assistance "deepened and widened anti-American feeling in Iran."

If Iran had wanted to just throw of the American yoke and not been so annoying about they'd be in much better shape. Look at the Vietnamese - they kicked the US out, they did it without Ho Chi Minh yelling "death to America" for 50 years, and today in 2026 the US and Vietnam get along just fine, we're even somewhat friendly. But of course Iran can't help themselves, paramount is defeating the great satan. This is the general theme - they just can't help themselves.

Another example - the Fatwa against Salman Rushdie. What does Iran get from this? I can't think of anything but to satisfy some internal muslim purity demand. What did they lose? A decade of sour relations with the UK and Europe. And they made him famous, and he sold a ton of books.

More recently - some girl doesn't wear her hijab right so they kill her. What does Iran gain from this? International condemnation, international sanctions, half a year of internal protests where they shoot hundreds more. Shocking that Iran's most educated and (what would be) their most productive citizens don't want to live in that envornment. Shocking their elite human capital doesn't want to live in an islamic theocracy. Really serves the national interest to scare those people off, but hey - at least allah is happy.

Honestly there are like a million things like this of Iran being stupid because they're led by islamic fundamentalists. Is it in Iran's interest to keep picking fights with Israel? What exactly is the root of that conflict, Iran's security needs? Or because they don't like da Joos? How exactly is their nuclear weapons program going? They endure decades of economic isolation, for what? Where are the nukes? Did they stick it to the great satan with the nukes, or did they get no nukes and get bombed? There are ways to defend yourself without making yourself an international pariah, but they can't help but fund every terrorist org in existence. Like oh my god, shocking they get regularly bombed.

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