site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2d ago (text post)   10551 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 28, 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.

You said Trump had won in your previous posts and the war was over. So is America winning or has it won? Have you accepted the war isn’t over yet? It’s also hilarious to me that you count going back to pre-war levels as winning. Congratulations on getting back to the exact same place we were before the war I guess.

> Iran suffers crippling permanent military defeat > America suffers temporary and minor economic setback

This was true six months ago and it's obvious today. This was always how the war was progressing which is why I have argued so consistently that the war was won: that's a fair vocabulary when Germany is up 7-2 and the game is technically still in play.

So just so we are on the same page: the war is over and Iran has lost. The US has effectively a 100% chance of accomplishing all its goals. So it’s not winning, it has won.

Iran is negotiating its surrender. The war is over and Iran has lost.

Iran's "negotiations" are fake. They think Trump will be foolish enough to release the blockade on their promise for a peace deal, which will allow them to export a bunch of oil and buy themselves some time. Then they reneg and fire on ships again just like last time. Trump seems uninterested in this idea, fortunately.

What will you say if they don’t surrender and don’t give up their nuclear material?

Then oil will continue flowing through the Straits, and Iran's economy will continue collapsing. Exactly as it has since June.

You need to change your victory proof to oil returning to, say, $70 per barrel or below. There is no doubt that the war is still screwing up the supply of oil, and the proof is the price.

And when the Democrats win the midterms and invoke War Powers Resolution law because Americans don’t want this to go on indefinitely… what then? This is an unpopular war and nobody wants this to go on for years. Trump is on the clock. He doesn’t have unlimited time.

War powers resolution is toothless. Needs a veto propf majority to mean anything so it's all theater

Maybe they can try Impeaching Trump?

The have a lot more options than that.

And when the Democrats win the midterms and invoke War Powers Resolution law because Americans don’t want this to go on indefinitely… what then?

Trump vetoes.

If the Republicans get absolutely hammered because of Trump, non-MAGA Republicans will eventually go against him. Trump keeping America unilaterally in an unpopular war with no end in sight will be a disaster for Republicans and they will turn on him eventually and on the war. The media will absolutely run with this too to help Democrats. They have the power of the purse still too. I just don’t see this lasting 2 more years unless Iran wants it to last 2 more years. I hope I’m wrong and the regime collapses but I just don’t see that happening.

Sure, but there's a lot of ruin in a nation. Iran might be able to just outlast Trump and end the war with a pinkie promise to President Newsom (or AOC). Then toll the strait and nuke Tel Aviv.

The war isn't about oil for the US, it's about Iran's nuclear program. Oil was just away for Iran to strike back. If non-Iranian oil is flowing and their nuclear program is stymied, Iran is losing and America is winning. Except that gas and diesel prices say that's not actually the case.

Certainly the war is not over, not until the US can reduce military presence at least back to pre-war levels without anything bad happening, said bad things including Iran shooting at merchant traffic.

I agree 100%. I actually had a similar comment last week saying basically the same thing you said in your second paragraph. As long as the US military can’t and the area isn’t the same as it was pre-war, the war is far from over. I don’t see any easy solutions for this other than giving Iran concessions that are not acceptable, so this war will continue for the foreseeable future in my opinion.

I also listed Trump’s pre-war aims noting that only one (destruction of their Navy) had been completed so the war is not over by Trump’s own standards. OP said they all had been accomplished, but I just don’t see that being anywhere close to reality.

The USA actually seems to be reducing military engagement in the region below prewar levels, with the announcement today that troops are pulling out of Iraq. (Again)

I pray that a peace deal is reached, and to a lesser extent that it is favorable to the United States and does not lead to the destruction of Israel.

Withdrawal from iraq is on a timeline set well before the iran conflict. Regardless of whether it was a good idea it's only fulfilling past obligations made years ago. In fact it was Joe Biden who set the timeline.

I don’t see any easy solutions for this other than giving Iran concessions that are not acceptable, so this war will continue for the foreseeable future in my opinion.

Concessions won't even work, since they won't stick to their end. They're going to have to be destroyed, or they will win. Whether that can be done through attrition or is going to require actual invasion is still up in the air.

This is essentially the argument I made last week, so I agree 100%. The concessions I was talking about were ones that are a non-starter that would be so humiliating that the US would never accept them. But you are probably right that even if they got those, they will push for even more eventually. Thats why I made the argument last week to OP that the war isn’t over and the US can only win if the Iranian regime collapses.

"if the Iranian regime collapses."

Had a back and forth with "Lion of the Blogosphere" on X, he in favor the war. We agreed on this point about the regime, but I claimed the fallout would be even more refugees flooding into Europe. He responded, "that's Europe's problem." Incredible.

Agreed. The US could potentially cause the Middle East to go into even more chaos and that could have consequences all over Eurasia. Best case scenario to me is we go back to the pre-war situation, and that obviously won’t be worth the cost of the war.

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