site banner
PaperclipPerfector  26d ago (text post)   27088 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.

I'm genuinely confused about why the Iranians (apparently) care about the midterms. Didn't we just get through four years of the Democrats letting Israel do whatever it pleased?

My sense is that there is growing anti-Israel sentiment in the Democratic Party. If I were Iran's current leadership, I would want more Democrats in power in the US. Possibly it's won't help the situation, but I think Iran's leadership is pretty desperate at this point.

I don't think either of those things make much sense. If Iran were desperate, they'd probably be directing their appeals to the disillusioned young men of the country who might be able to make something happen, rather than to Karen (43 ans) who would've voted blue anyways. The anti-Israel Dems have proven themselves pretty toothless on a very consistent basis, to the point where Trump's support of Israel has met more intra-party opposition than Biden's.

Keep in mind that everyone insisting Iran's desperate and on the brink of collapse has been insisting exactly that since the first week of the war. My best guess is that the messaging is the product of some high-level leader's daft, out-of-touch cousin who got appointed Secretary of American PR because he's too incompetent to put anywhere else.

If Iran were desperate, they'd probably be directing their appeals to the disillusioned young men of the country who might be able to make something happen, rather than to Karen (43 ans) who would've voted blue anyways

If Iran cared about the US midterm elections, what exactly would Iran be doing or not doing, in your view?

The anti-Israel Dems have proven themselves pretty toothless on a very consistent basis,

Well do you agree that anti-Israel sentiment has grown significantly in the Democratic party even in the last few years?

Keep in mind that everyone insisting Iran's desperate and on the brink of collapse has been insisting exactly that since the first week of the war.

I'm not sure what your point is here. I'm certainly not trying to argue that Iran is on the brink of collapse.

If Iran cared about the US midterm elections, what exactly would Iran be doing or not doing, in your view?

What? My position is that they do seem to care, and are wrong to care.

Well do you agree that anti-Israel sentiment has grown significantly in the Democratic party even in the last few years?

Sentiment and policy outcome are two very different things. In the GOP, the populists are strong and fighty enough to occasionally force an issue they care about. In the DNC, they're either too unagentic (in the case of migrant anti-Israelism) or too thoroughly 'buckbroken' (in the case of redditor anti-Israelism) to meaningfully contest the party establishment. AOC being made to vote in favor of an Israel aid bill that was already going to pass by a massive margin is a pretty useful case study.

My position is that they do seem to care, and are wrong to care.

Ok, and in your view, what are they doing to influence the outcome of the elections? And what would they do differently if they were desperate?

Sentiment and policy outcome are two very different things. In the GOP, the populists are strong and fighty enough to occasionally force an issue they care about. In the DNC, they're either too unagentic (in the case of migrant anti-Israelism) or too thoroughly 'buckbroken' (in the case of redditor anti-Israelism) to meaningfully contest the party establishment. AOC being made to vote in favor of an Israel aid bill that was already going to pass by a massive margin is a pretty useful case study.

I guess that means your answer is "yes"?

what are they doing to influence the outcome of the elections?

Aside from all of the recent moves that can conceivably be dismissed as having some other motivation, they penned a 24 page "letter to the American public" in which they explicitly stated that they wanted to influence the midterm elections in favor of the Democrats and that voting for them was what they wanted Americans to do.

I'm not joking, by the way, you can Google this. It's utterly baffling that that's the message they'd write to the dozen or so Americans willing to read a 24 page letter from the Iranian government in full, but it is indeed what they wrote.

Aside from all of the recent moves that can conceivably be dismissed as having some other motivation, they penned a 24 page "letter to the American public" in which they explicitly stated that they wanted to influence the midterm elections in favor of the Democrats and that voting for them was what they wanted Americans to do.

I'm not joking, by the way, you can Google this. It's utterly baffling that that's the message they'd write to the dozen or so Americans willing to read a 24 page letter from the Iranian government in full, but it is indeed what they wrote.

Well you don't seem to deny that as of late there has been growing anti-Israel sentiment in the Democratic party. Nor do you seem to deny that the Iranian leadership is desperate. (Not desperate in the sense of being on the brink of collapse, but desperate in the sense of being extremely squeezed financially.) Those two facts offer a reasonably good explanation for this letter you cite.

I think the problem is that writing that letter is basically guaranteed to backfire -- if competent, the GOP could probably force a Dem opponent to denounce it (and the Iranian regime's human rights record), weakening their anti-war stance/creds. I'd imagine, at least.

I think the problem is that writing that letter is basically guaranteed to backfire

I wouldn't go that far, because you never really know what will happen, but yeah, certainly it may be a Hail Mary play.

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