site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   25593 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 7, 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.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

"When Russians shoot Ukrainians, that's bad; When Ukrainians shoot Russians, that's good". Such Hottentot Morality.

Try: "When Russians bomb Ukrainian civilian infra, that's bad. When Ukrainians bomb Russian civilian infra, that's… actually also bad". There is a fine line between justified reciprocity and a race to the bottom. In war, it's hard. But bribing the electorate is not retaliation against the outgroup, it's just contributing to the burning of the commons. Trump is simply corrupt swine.

And frankly, you are not at war, you're all on the same side, as infinitely opulent burgers bored out of their minds, locked in their conflict mostly for entertainment, like aspects of Chaos.

In a democracy buying votes is a weapon. Specifically, the type of weapon that tends to get banned by international treaties, that's the whole reason why it's such a taboo / is seen as "burning of the commons". I don't think civilian infra is a good analogy, unless it can be show there's a direct connection of it to performance on the battlefield. It's relatively easy to take the high road and not retaliate against pointless cruelty, it's another thing entirely to take the high road over something that gives your enemy an actual strategic advantage.

I also disagree this is not a war, and I don't think it's specifically an American thing, the entire western world seems locked in the same conflict. Oh, and I'm not a burger.

it's another thing entirely to take the high road over something that gives your enemy an actual strategic advantage.

The thing is, Trump does not consider it a bad thing at all. He's not saying "I'll retaliate and then we'll negotiate that nobody does this thing again". He just considers it a neat weapon. He doesn't care for the commons.

Destroying civilian infra does have direct effects on the battlefield. Russians mostly bomb logistics and energy systems, the pure terror component is magnified by Ukrainian propaganda; Ukrainian strikes are likewise mostly rational (plus some of it is retaliation for boosting morale). It's still bad for everyone because it incentivizes a race to the bottom where civilian suffering is disproportionate to the delta in battlefield results.

The thing is, Trump does not consider it a bad thing at all. He's not saying "I'll retaliate and then we'll negotiate that nobody does this thing again".

And the thing about that is, how long have we seen politicians selling votes? When was Social Security implemented? Medicare? Medicaid? 7 zillion welfare and various pork barrel spending programs no one has even heard of? I too dream of a politician coming in and, dare I say, draining the swamp, but this has been going on for a century or so. At that point it's just standard warfare, rather than something that calls for international tribunals.

But it's not clear if they are even buying votes. Gibs are the essence of leftism, redistribution is the bulk of their value proposition of egalitarianism. If you simply concede that it's the winning move in a democracy, you should focus on dismantling democracy.

But it's not clear if they are even buying votes. Gibs are the essence of leftism, redistribution is the bulk of their value proposition of egalitarianism.

Ok, so is subsidizing stay at home mothers even buying votes for the right then? "Muh family values" is the essence of conservatism, and if it's surprising that previously free market conservatives are now pushing redistribution, Trump ran on interventionist economics since at least 2016.

If you simply concede that it's the winning move in a democracy, you should focus on dismantling democracy.

Would that I could.

Unironically yes. Learning how to step away from this viewpoint was one of the big things about the Enlightenment.

That's odd, I distinctly recall lots of people being killed not just as a direct result of, but in the name of the Enlightenment.

And while I'm sure extreme pacifists existed among Enlightment thinkers, I don't think "it's morally wrong to repell an invading army" was a representative view among them.

don't think "it's morally wrong to repell an invading army" was a representative view among them.

You have failed to mirror it. As much as this is "Hottentot Morality":

"When Russians shoot Ukrainians, that's bad; When Ukrainians shoot Russians, that's good"

This is also "Hottentot Morality"

"When Russians shoot Ukrainians, that's good; When Ukrainians shoot Russians, that's bad"

I would call it just being tribal, but the clear distinction is conflict theory-like. "My side is good so anything we do is good and justified, the other side is not-us and thus is bad, anything they do is bad and unjustified, even if its the exact same thing we do"

You have failed to mirror

How? I agree that the Hottentot Morality criticism would be just as incoherent if it was about Russians defending themselves from a Ukrainian invasion, adding that would just be reduntant.

"My side is good so anything we do is good and justified, the other side is not-us and thus is bad, anything they do is bad and unjustified, even if its the exact same thing we do"

I don't see where this is happening.

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