site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4d ago (text post)   16241 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.

7
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Court opinion:

  • Way back in year 1995, the Ohio govt. establishes a pilot school-voucher program exclusively for low-income families in the struggling Cleveland school district. Taxpayers sue, alleging that the pilot program violates the state constitution's requirement that the state govt. “secure a thorough and efficient system of common schools”. In year 1999, the state supreme court rejects that argument: “We fail to see how the School Voucher Program, at the current funding level, undermines the state's obligation to public education.”

  • Over the ensuing three decades, the state govt. gradually enlarges the school-voucher program. In 2005, it is expanded to school districts at the lowest performance rating statewide; in 2006, it is expanded to school districts at the second-lowest performance rating; in 2013, the performance-rating limits are completely eliminated; over the 2015–2022 period, the income limits are increased from low-income to moderate-income; and, in 2023, the income limits are completely eliminated.

  • Accordingly, in year 2026, a state appeals panel decides that the expanded program diverts taxpayer funds away from govt. schools to such an extent that it violates the state constitution.

    EdChoice, as presently structured and funded, secures with taxpayer funds a competing system of uncommon schools that is not subject to the same obligations imposed on Ohio's system of common schools. This system of uncommon schools violates the mandate of Ohio Const. art. VI § 2 to secure “a thorough and efficient system of common schools throughout the state”. Although statutes are entitled to a strong presumption of constitutionality, that presumption has been overcome here. Participating non-public schools are subject to materially less extensive state oversight, they cherry-pick students from public schools, they are geographically isolated in Ohio's urban centers, and they receive taxpayer funding in a manner that operates at the expense and detriment of Ohio's public schools, and, consequently, the children who depend on those public schools for instruction, support, and opportunities that shape their future.

    Whether the state supreme court will agree remains to be seen.

Of particular culture-war relevance is the part to which I have added emphasis above. I think it has already been noted on this website that govt. school districts in urban areas spend massive amounts of money for little gain. Here we see private schools proliferating in those same urban areas (implying that parents in those areas are champing at the bit to divert their tax money away from govt. schools), only to be stymied by the state constitution. (For context in reading the following quote, see the federal Census Bureau's official map of counties and urban areas, and recall previous criticism of the US's definition of "urban".)

Ohio's public schools satisfy the statewide requirement and exist in all 88 counties. The evidence in the record regarding EdChoice private schools, however, reflects a different geographic distribution. During discovery, ODEW [Ohio Dept. of Education and Workforce] provided a list of all EdChoice schools at which at least 75 percent of their students received EdChoice vouchers. The list contains the names of 154 private schools. Reviewing the list provided by ODEW, 67 of the 154 schools, or 44 percent, are located in just 3 counties: Cuyahoga [i. e., the major urban area of Cleveland], Franklin [Columbus], and Hamilton [Cincinnati]. In fact, Ohio's 16 “urban counties” are home to 89 percent of the schools contained on ODEW's list.

Evidence in the record shows that families in many rural counties have substantially fewer opportunities to use EdChoice vouchers. For instance, no school on the list is located in Northwest Ohio outside of Lucas [Toledo] and Allen [Lima] Counties. Only one school on the list is located in Southeast Ohio, and no school on ODEW's list is located in Marietta [urban area of 22,000 people as of 2020], Athens [27,000], Chillicothe [32,000], or Steubenville [65,000 in an urban area split between two states, 18,000 in city limits]. EdChoice and its expansions are funded through statewide tax revenue but are not accessible to many living in the rural parts of the state. In effect, EdChoice is subsidizing urban private schools with rural dollars.

Statistics for Ohio school districts as of 2025: 1 2

StatisticClevelandStatewide averageChillicothe
Students per mi24009396
Students32,0002,3002,400
Black students (%)61187
White students (%)136773
Instructional expenditure per student (k$/a)141110
Total expenditure per student (k$/a)262117
High-school test proficiency rate (%)393458
Total test proficiency rate (%)333152

Unless you compare the urban kids in private with the urban kids in public this table isn't helpful. Its also distorted by the racial makeup.

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