site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2d ago (text post)   8303 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 12, 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.

6
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'd like to contrast two opinions that were posted here a while back to hopefully make a larger point.

Below there are arguments from @Southkraut posted in this chain of discussion:

By the right wing in a political spectrum that has shifted so far left that even the most tepid immigration control measures are considered the extreme of permissible politics. I'm sorry, but no, this movement to the right in no way proves that the left is not in firm control. Their electoral setbacks are, in the greater scheme of things, temporary and minor, while their social and demographic victories are permanent and far-reaching. Yes they overreached, did too much too quickly and alienated voters that way, but the left needing to spend some time without control of this or that executive or legislative and seeing a small fraction of their accomplishments rolled back is not proof of the lasting ascendancy of the right.

Even if this should be the full awakening of the natives to their intentional replacement and the imminent grab for power of the right over all the governments of Europe and even the end of all immigration, the demographic damage is done. The left can afford to let go of the reins of states for a while, or maybe even altogether. It won't change the fate of the continent at this point.

Yes we currently have an upswing of right-wing sentiment as the leftist strangelhold on public discourse slackens, but that's because the leftists, in their time of triumph, overreached somewhat while already on the finishing line. But it's only a stumble; they can and most likely will recover, and if the footrace metaphor holds, then this stumble makes no difference because the right is crawling along far behind with its legs hacked off and bleeding out.

The left has already won. The takeover happened, and it held, and still holds. All public institutions all over Europe are firmly in the hands of leftist partisans. All the predominant narratives that public discourse rests on are shaped by leftist framing. And above all, greatest accomplishment and final victory of the left, demographics are a done deal. The natives are on an inescapable track towards becoming minorities in their own countries, and foreigners will become the majority in Europe within this century. There is no fixing this, and there is no suriviving it for the right.

And below is a comment by @MaiqTheTrue:

My thoughts are that this stems directly from their view of the world. To them America and the West are a dystopian nightmare.

White Guilt, and present militarism

In Liberal circles, white people, and particularly white Americans, are racist, militaristic, and colonial. They also perceive that none of it is changing even a little bit. We support Israel which is racist and genocidal, we hold down minorities, and enrich ourselves at the expense of the non-whites of the world. And they see it as nobody aside from them actually caring.

Environment

Liberals believe that Earth will be literally uninhabitable within their lifetime. The air will be choked with pollution, the rivers poisoned, global warming creating deserts and rain forests and making things too hot. Nobody wants to do enough to fix it, and quite often want to go in the other direction. They see that nobody aside from them cares.

Capitalism

The rich run the world for the rich and everyone else suffers. Poverty is common, and all the things that should be free are instead not free. College costs too much. Health care costs too much. And again, none of this is noticed by anyone else, so nothing will change.

Trump

You might not notice, but we elected Literally Hitler in November. He’s going to build work camps. He’s going to round people up and either imprison them or deport them. The Handmaid’s Tale is going to happen. Again, nobody notices or cares and worse, half the country likes it. Which proves that white people are evil.

All of this is a profoundly negative world view. Dystopian even. Everything is terrible, and at best going to stay terrible forever, and very likely to get worse. If this is how you really see the world, obviously that’s going to give you anxiety and depression, especially if you’re hanging around others who share this view, and have few or no outside interests.

As far as I'm concerned one can also add "Sexism" and "Social media" to that list. (We can certainly say, for example, that the Blue Tribe mainly blames supposedly harmful social media trends - basically the fatal lack of external censorship and repression - for Trump's election victories in 2016 and 2024 and for Brexit as well.) And as far as the anti-anti-Zionist liberals are concerned, their attitude towards anti-Semitism is the same. Either way, this summary does strike me as spot on. Whenever I encounter members of the Blue Tribe online or even offline it's undoubtedly this pessimistic, doomerist, resentful, even elegiac vibe I'm getting most of the time, especially from single women. And this seems to have been a cultural trend since Gamergate. In contrast, I think the victories of modern liberalism have mainly stemmed from its image of representing not an ideology but the consensus among cool and smart people promoting the vision of a better tomorrow, basically someone like your cool and cheerful wine-drinking, pot-smoking aunt/uncle. It was this vibe that helped them gain electoral victories as well and now this vibe is completely dead. Now we're at a point where the political parties in the EU representing Blue Tribe normies are basically campaigning with the message to having to fight yet another great Eastern European war in the very near future which is supposedly necessary to avert some even bigger disaster or something.

I'd argue that it's actually the profound pessimism of Blue Tribe messaging and its political consequences that Southkraut's pessimism is not taking into account.

Some thoughts on this one of the most important things that I feel often get overlooked here is that AOC is not the average democrat she's the farthest left Democrat in congress, Biden won the primary running against universal healthcare and the woke approved candidate Bernie lost. When it looked like Bernie was going to win centrist democrats were having breakdowns live on CNN Most democrats in congress still support Israel and Kamala and Biden both barely made a peep about Gaza while still sending Israel. The type of liberal endlessly critiqued here doesn't have that much influence in the democratic party despite their huge influence on culture.

Now some might rightly point out that these are foundations of sand and I agree the democratic establishment is on borrowed time and I agree but it is still a massive juggernaut and I'm not confident it will be overturned in the next presidential politics. While the online is bleeding into real life it's not fully there yet everyone online was all for Bernie or maybe Warren Biden was essentially null totally unrepresented and if you listened to the online voice he had no chance because no one was for him and yet the olds and conservative black primary voters loved him and pulled the lever for him.

Of course those people have little influence on culture and aren't posters so their invisible to the very online and even the culture war, they aren't fanatics either endlessly pushing so they'll likely lose foundations of sand and so on but any political analysis here should have to deal with the fact that the type of progressives endlessly skewered on the motte can barely muster ten seats in congress. In the EU too many of these parties are center right in coaltion with the center left, Germany for example and France with a right wing government led by Macron.

Now there are some things Biden was radical on, Trans kids and immigration for example, but even here liberals actually don't want open borders. Liberals all think that is a "Republican lie" because they don't they want easier immigration and asylumn seekers to be able to come. But most liberal Americans supporting immigration means supporting the immigrants here the actual details are immaterial.

Now we're at a point where the political parties in the EU representing Blue Tribe normies are basically campaigning with the message to having to fight yet another great Eastern European war in the very near future which is supposedly necessary to avert some even bigger disaster or something.

Because they view the Ukraine war as an existential threat to the end of history and they liberal world order. They are threatened by the Russia attack on Ukraine the way you are threatened by immigration. And they aren't saying they should fight a war just they they should arm themselves to protect themselves and their families as Russia has shown itself to be a threat. A very conservative message if you think about it, and the fact that Normie liberals are willing to fly Ukrainian flags and raise money voluntarily for weapons and equipment for Ukraine should show that they aren't all civilizational nihilists willing to lay down and die when their version of civilization is threatened.

Because they view the Ukraine war as an existential threat to the end of history and they liberal world order.

It rather seems that they did away with the ‘End of History’ thesis already and no longer believe that the process of globalization can continue in they way they generally imagined (well, fantasized) that it would. I think this should, in turn, reinforce the perception that they have recently (around 2014 or so) adopted a rather pessimist worldview. They are now treating Russia, China, North Korea, India and their ‘puppets’ as an enemy bloc that is to be sanctioned and cordoned off from the rest of the world that has inexorably and thankfully transitioned to liberal globalism.

And they aren't saying they should fight a war just they they should arm themselves to protect themselves and their families as Russia has shown itself to be a threat. A very conservative message if you think about it

I argue there are aspects to Western foreign policy regarding Ukraine that should at least make it rather questionable to conservatives. The most obvious one is that it’s happening in the context of a long-term policy of eastward NATO expansion (with a bunch of consequences of its own) which I think US conservatives should at least be skeptical about. The second is that whenever liberals emphasize the supposedly huge cultural differences between Ukraine and Russia the always focus on the wonderful globohomo-ness of the former; this should at least make conservatives think twice about the whole affair. The third I can think of is that the more cynical liberal-adjacent talking heads seem willing to admit that it’s not for the prosperity and well-being of the Ukrainian people that the war should be escalated but to weaken Russia which in turn is supposed to have fantastic benefits in the future or something. Again, obvious grounds for skepticism, I think. Four: conservatives should ponder what exactly the long-term goal of Atlanticist policy regarding Ukraine in particular was after 2004 or so and especially after 2014.

Now some might rightly point out that these are foundations of sand and I agree the democratic establishment is on borrowed time and I agree but it is still a massive juggernaut and I'm not confident it will be overturned in the next presidential politics.

I’m guessing you’re referring to the gerontocratic nature of the Dem leadership?

eastward NATO expansion

NATO is a defensive alliance. It is only a threat to those who invade the member-countries. It does not invade others. While the NATO members have participated in UN-sanctioned attacks, Russia has a veto and so no need to be afraid of that either.

Thus, NATO-expansion is a useful tool for propaganda, but it is not actually a reason to go to war and should not be taken seriously.

NATO is a defensive alliance.

So what? America would not tolerate defensive alliances of their neighbors with China, it's kinda of insane to expect Russia to do so as long as they have the strength to oppose it.

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