site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   6208 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 14, 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.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Agreed on all points but they have oodles of cash floating around, they can't hire some redneck PR consultants?

Because that's not the thing they want. "Make sure AI is aligned with human values" always, from the start, had the unspoken but clear assumption "where human values means San Franciscan liberal values".

I'm not one bit surprised China is refusing to get with the AI slowdown. I've always asked "What's in it for China? Why should China agree?" If the idea is "Make sure all AI globally is stuffed full of the kind of anti-everything bad, pro-everything good where 'bad' and 'good' are judged by "what would get the San Francisco Board of Supervisors seal of approval?" then is anyone really surprised the CCP is "Um, we're not so sure about that"?

What's in it for China? Why should China agree?

Well, they presumably do not want to be turned into paperclips.

We believe in pluralism. Regardless of if you're a fan of Scott Weiner or Connie Chan, you're welcome in our big tent.

Yeah. If Dario cared at all about AI safety the first thing he would do is step down, or at least stop making public appearances. His bad comms have done untold damage to the AI safety movement.

So what's up with him? Does he lack the wisdom to see the damage he is doing? Or is he power-seeking?

Main character syndrome. Even the founding of Anthropic itself was an error (maybe the fundamental error) from a safety point of view: having some differences of opinion around product safety decisions is not a reason to start a rival lab creating exactly the kind of competitive dynamics people have warned about for decades.

I genuinely think that for these people, the world does not exist outside of the Bay Area/Silicon Valley bubble. Oh sure, Washington because the politicians, maybe New York for money, but the 'real world' is only the one they personally inhabit and the people they interact with, the rest of us are just NPCs.

‘America B’

They could but how well equipped are they to judge Trump-whispering skills or redneckism?

Imagine the opposite. Would the rednecks know which blue-haired transgender could get them moving in the Portland slam poetry scene (which they need for some reason)? There would be all kinds of problems I think.

Firstly, the rednecks don't really want to be there, it's a purely instrumental goal. Secondly, it'd be hard for them to tell who's good and who's bad, what do they know about this? Thirdly, they don't live near them, so it's a bit of a pain to work with them just logistically. Fourthly, they'd struggle to understand the do's and don'ts, what questions they even need to be asking, how to formulate their approach.

Fifth it would be embarassing to their redneck friends working with xi/xir. I think this is a big issue with the labs, they're already competing like mad for talented programmers. Young, hyper-educated STEM workers lean anti-Trump.

In the 2024 election cycle, employees of Google’s parent company, Alphabet, have overwhelmingly donated to the Democratic ticket, with approximately 98% of their contributions going to Kamala Harris.

And sixth the whole project is unauthentic. The slam-poetry scene can tell that these guys are rednecks, not really part of the community. They'd be on guard the whole time for whatever trickery or shilling the rednecks are doing.

This is extra hard for the AI labs since Trump-whispering is an international geopolitical affair. Everyone wants to be that man's friend. Everyone is going to say 'oh I can get along well with Trump' whether it's true or not. You really need to have good connections to make things happen. Aschenbrenner's finance friends can do that but Anthropic can't, I think.

Trump must have a million people trying to jabber in his ear to do X, Y, Z.

In the 2024 election cycle, employees of Google’s parent company, Alphabet, have overwhelmingly donated to the Democratic ticket, with approximately 98% of their contributions going to Kamala Harris

How smart can they be if they backed the no-hoper? That's snarky, but it's all of a piece with the Carrick Flynn election effort. Two minutes reading about the candidates there had me going "The union candidate is gonna get it" and lo, so it came to pass. All the smart, well-meaning, hopeful people with the FTX (ahem) money were looking in the wrong direction - at what they thought was The Mostest Important Issue Ever (pandemic prevention, remember those days? today they'd probably run someone on AI doom) and not "what are the voters in this new district in this state likely to feel are important to them?"

That's the trouble. "We are really really smart and we think this is the most urgent thing so everybody should think it's the most urgent thing and we don't need to know the views of others who don't think it's the most urgent thing because they're not as smart as us".

To quote "The Man Who Was Thursday":

Then all Bull’s boiling good sense and optimism broke suddenly out of him.

“Oh, this is all raving nonsense!” he cried. “If you really think that ordinary people in ordinary houses are anarchists, you must be madder than an anarchist yourself. If we turned and fought these fellows, the whole town would fight for us.”

...“I think,” said Dr. Bull with precision, “that I am lying in bed at No. 217 Peabody Buildings, and that I shall soon wake up with a jump; or, if that’s not it, I think that I am sitting in a small cushioned cell in Hanwell, and that the doctor can’t make much of my case. But if you want to know what I don’t think, I’ll tell you. I don’t think what you think. I don’t think, and I never shall think, that the mass of ordinary men are a pack of dirty modern thinkers. No, sir, I’m a democrat, and I still don’t believe that Sunday could convert one average navvy or counter-jumper. No, I may be mad, but humanity isn’t.”

... Dr. Bull tossed his sword into the sea.

“There never was any Supreme Anarchist Council,” he said. “We were all a lot of silly policemen looking at each other. And all these nice people who have been peppering us with shot thought we were the dynamiters. I knew I couldn’t be wrong about the mob,” he said, beaming over the enormous multitude, which stretched away to the distance on both sides. “Vulgar people are never mad. I’m vulgar myself, and I know. I am now going on shore to stand a drink to everybody here.”

To get anywhere, AI issue people are going to have to deal with and convince ordinary vulgar people, and they won't do that by appeals that work for a particular set of 'modern thinkers'.

Everyone wants to be that man's friend. Everyone is going to say 'oh I can get along well with Trump' whether it's true or not.

I seldom want to respond to a post with peals of laughter but this has to come close. Pretty much every visible government in the West doesn't like Trump and makes it a point of pride about how they don't want to get along with him.

I agree, but I think that with genuine care these problems are addressable. If you actually, sincerely, care about AI safety more than you do about not getting on with rednecks, you can go and meet these people, you can spend time with them, you can ask them sincere questions because you really care about getting honest answers. Understanding other cultures is tough and comes with pitfalls for sure, but it's still something you can do with a little care.

Just get your senior guys to turn up to a bunch of slam-poetry recitals to start with, get a feel for it, get the lay of the land, work out who's important. Actually being open minded gets you 50% of the way there. After a few months you can at least get a feel for which PR consultants are bullshitters and which ones are authentic.

Fifth it would be embarassing to their redneck friends working with xi/xir. I think this is a big issue with the labs, they're already competing like mad for talented programmers. Young, hyper-educated STEM workers lean anti-Trump.

This is the main constraint, I think. The AI safety people only think their priority is 100% AI safety, it's actually about 60% AI safety; 40% not looking bad to their friends and getting redneck/trans taint on them.

You really need to have good connections to make things happen. Aschenbrenner's finance friends can do that but Anthropic can't, I think. Trump must have a million people trying to jabber in his ear to do X, Y, Z.

Yes, but how many of them potentially hold America's future in their hands? Trump and his administration clearly cares about AI to some degree, they've tweeted about it, served legal notices on it. The door is open, you just have to let them walk through it now and again, and be willing to say nice things when they do.

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