site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   1430 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for September 6, 2026

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I see Twitter throwing a fit over AfD winning or almost winning in Germany. Can somebody please loop me in about the drama of it all?

As I understand, AfD is the only non-woke, non-pro-civilizational-destruction party in Germany, and the only one with chances of winning something in Western Europe in general. Which of course makes them literally Hitler, as anything that threatens woke powers is. Every single Republican candidate has been literally Hitler since literally Hitler, and every non-woke European party will get the same treatment. Especially one that has any chances of winning any votes. This is just how it works.

That said, it's only one state, and they didn't even get the majority - they are the largest party, but only 39 out of 83 seats. I am not sure what could they do with such setup - likely, a lot of heat but not sure anything could change. Most of Germany's problem will need federal policy change, as I understand, and a plurality in one state does nothing.

Minor quibble- Italy's actually governed by the Fratelli d'Italia, FN will probably win the next French elections, and Spain may well have a right-populist government in the near future. And who even knows UK politics.

Spain may well have a right-populist government in the near future

We'll see. It doesn't yet. If that happens, I'll be happy, the current state of Spain is extremely sad.

Every single Republican candidate has been literally Hitler since literally Hitler,

Was Eisenhower ever accused of this? His, uh, "punching Nazis" bona fides are effectively unquestionable. I'd buy it for every other one, though.

Looks like you are right, while Dewey has been compared to Hitler all the time, with Eisenhower it was more like "he is a great man but since he's a Republican, he's still a captive of the right wing, who as we all know are literally you know who, so..." But yes, Eisenhower is an exception, but both before and after him everybody has been.

From Grok: From communists and the far left: This is where associations with fascism occasionally appeared. East German Communist leader Wilhelm Pieck in September 1952 attacked Eisenhower’s call for a “crusade against communism” (in a speech to the American Legion) as repeating “the program devised by Adolf Hitler” and using “the language of Hitler and Goebbels.” U.S. Communist Party materials from the period sometimes warned that the Eisenhower administration represented a “sharpened war and fascist danger,” linked McCarthyism and anti-communist policies to fascist tendencies, or framed the Republican victory as heightening fascist risks.

So yeah, same same. The center libs were too circumspect to accuse Eisenhower of fascism directly, but the far left wasn't.

I'll go further and say neither you nor I will ever see a Republican candidate for important office anywhere, ever, who isn't called a Nazi/Fascist/Hitler. Nor will we ever see such a candidate fail to garner some vague rape claims, often by large numbers of anonymous women. The only question is how far toward the center believing such things extends.

I suppose you're probably right on a literal level here, but it seems like there needs to be some level of notoriety to the claims, or it's almost trivially true of any public figure. It's probably true for every member of Congress. It might be true for most city council persons nationwide, even.

Ken Paxton doesn't seem to be accused of any of this stuff- he's receiving perfectly accurate accusations(that he's an adulterer who takes bribes) instead.

The normal corruption is easier and thus a more common tone, but it's still present.

And the local AfD leader says he wants either the absolute majority or to repeat the elections, but no compromises.

Ah well. Salvini again.

I mean, if there's no party they could ally with that would allow them to do anything meaningful - which seems to be the case right now - then what's the point of forming a coalition which would continue more of the same and prove AfD is as incapable of delivering on their promises as everybody else? At least staying outside allows them not to accept responsibility for the shit that's happening, once they are nominally in power, the responsibility is theirs, and will be used against them next time when nothing changes.

They should really hammer on the immigration issue. That is their winning card. And yet no one was talking about it. People in Europe really want some foreigners gone.

Also Salvini got to power.

They should really hammer on the immigration issue. That is their winning card. And yet no one was talking about it. People in Europe really want some foreigners gone.

It's almost illegal to talk about it. Say the wrong words and your entire party gets blasted as unconstitutional.

Also Salvini got to power.

And gave it up because he refused to compromise, certain that a fresh election would get him the free hand he desired instead.

And then he was gone.

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