site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   6445 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 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.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If you remove the foreigners who support foreign interests then they wouldn’t be campaigning for things some silly natives fall for.

Lefty(Bryan Caplan): We should have open borders and let in infinite migrants.

me: many of them support interests against American interests or loyalty to their home country. They will cause problems in domestic US politics

Lefty: our magic dirt will solve this problem. We can give them full political rights.

Bryan Caplan is not a lefty. He is for open borders. He would be happy to get rid of the welfare state as well.

Immigration and population replacement is what defines leftism in 2026. He is a blank slatist who believes in magic soil. So it makes him a leftist.

The fact that other leftists would happily line him up against the wall for his heretical beliefs? Well, that's leftism for you.

I do agree that unlike Bernie Sanders, who pivoted hard on immigration to stay relevant, Caplan is a principled leftist. Put him in the useful idiot category.

The fact that other leftists would happily line him up against the wall for his heretical beliefs? Well, that's leftism for you.

That's conservatism too, there is always some heretic that needs to be burnt. Some ideological bent, political position, or spiritual disease, that threatens the christian souls of our community!

It must be nice to see everything in a binary black and white partisan position, the one drop rule of political alignment. The 1D political axis truly is the malaise of the soul, the ultimate mindkiller. The devil ever sits on the shoulders of the self righteous.

That's conservatism too, there is always some heretic that needs to be burnt

Clearly, rightist moments have had that failure pattern, the Nazis being the most obvious example.

In the current epoch, the right, being the weaker party, calls for tolerance while the left bays for blood. And so it will go until the shoe is on the other foot. When that time comes, I'll probably become a leftist.

The devil ever sits on the shoulders of the self righteous.

Physician, heal thyself.

Bryan Caplan is not a blank slatist. "Let's Ban Discrimination: A Socratic Dialogue" makes it clear that he at least believes HBD is "a distinct possibility." More like he believes in indestructible institutions.

The West is great, even shitty people become much more productive when they come here, let's bring as many of them here as possible and let them earn their keep by finding their comparative advantage. Worried they will go on welfare or vote for communism? Let them come without eligibility for welfare or the right to vote.

It's completely delusional (how long did blacks remain slaves, again?), but it's not leftism.

Overton window moved. That makes him a lefty today. Maybe that makes him more of a homeless person now. The number 1 position he advocates for is a lefty position today.

No, that's not enough to make him a lefty. It makes him just a liberal, though right-liberal, and the right is moving away from liberalism, albeit still split. The left are mostly not liberals - in fact have not been liberals for longer - and don't want him.

There is no 'liberal' or 'classical liberal' position in history that includes open borders. As he justifies it, it's more of an extreme libertarian belief, and hardline libertarians have always been politically homeless from the moment they diverged from right-liberalism (which included freedom of the individual, but also the common good of the nation and the maintenance of tradition through non-governmental means). I believe Caplan would also describe himself as a libertarian.

Fine call him homeless. We don’t want him either.

Though would be noted his primary position “open borders” has strong support in the most activist left circles.

"I totally support this thing that has happened before, is likely happening now, and some people want to increase to a horrendous degree. I also support this thing that has never happened before and the last time someone tried it got struck down by a judge despite being passed with nearly 60% of the votes."

You'll excuse me if I no longer give people like Caplan the benefit of the doubt.

Speaking as someone who called himself a libertarian for 20 years, the logic was always:

  1. Open Borders
  2. Welfare State
  3. Functional Economy.

Pick two. Option number 2 is essentially non-negotiable at this point, and absolutely no one has even the faintest glimmer of a fantasy of a plan to actually address it, which means adding option 1 necessarily closes off option 3. Any libertarian failing to grasp this, at this point, is just a retard or engaged in enemy action.

Infinite migrants support lefty causes irregardless of relation to their home country

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