site banner
PaperclipPerfector  8hr ago (text post)   1354 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 26, 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.

Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Nobody in S America could ever convince me that Democracy is better than Fascism. You see huge swaths of Brazil vote on ethnic lines. Brazil at this point probably at a minimum needs to be broken into different countries. I don’t see why White Europeans should be governed by a corrupt commie because a bunch of negros voted for it.

In trading sometimes you are better lucky than good. I bought some Brazilian stuff after prediction markets were good for Bolsonaro but before the first round and I’m quite happy today that I dumped them on the big rip after the first round. Now everything I bought is 10% lower than my first buy and I’m wandering if Brazil is cheap enough to buy even with Lulu.

In trading sometimes you are better lucky than good. I bought some Brazilian stuff after prediction markets were good for Bolsonaro and I’m quite happy today that I dumped them on the big rip after the first round

I bought $PAGS which I was also up bigly on, but am now down. I wasn't gambling on the election, I just like the stock.

It's very, very tempting to day trade this. We have to bounce, right? 25% is unreal.

Edit: F it. I put $150k$230k into EWZ. Undervalued index anyway.

A 25% decline is not unreal for a surprise election win by the socialist party in a third-world country. Currency devaluation, property expropriation, excessive taxation, and bans on foreign distributions are all realistic possibilities. The US equity market is not a good reference benchmark for equity markets in other countries.

A 25% decline is not unreal for a surprise election win by the socialist party in a third-world country. Currency devaluation, property expropriation, excessive taxation, and bans on foreign distributions are all realistic possibilities.

Yeah, I think that the default assumption is that the market is reasonably efficient and is pricing in bona fide risks.

I think it does happen now and then that real inefficiencies develop; including inefficiencies that can be spotted and exploited by amateur investors and other laymen. But I think that's pretty unusual.

My instinct is that if you buy into the Brazilian markets today, it's like the proverbial sprint in front of a steam roller to grab a nickel off the pavement.

But then again, I'm one of those cautious long-term Boglehead type investors.

Agree that the US market is not a good reference, but out of curiosity, can you share any examples? I can't think of a single time when a country stock index collapsed 25% in a day off the top of my head. Which times did you remember in your investing career? I'm sure it's happened.

One thing to keep in mind is that the socialist President is already in charge.

Edit: I also just checked with ChatGPT. It's a little confusing because there are so many parties, but it does appear that that Bolsonaro aligned parties control about 70% of the lower chamber and 75% of the Senate. So it's quite possible Lula is impeached and removed. His corrupt judges can be removed more easily since it only takes the 2/3rds of the Senate, without lower house involvement.

So, at a minimum, Lula is extremely boxed in, his judges even more so.

Some reason INTR became my brazillian crack. In around 5 pre-first election out at like 6.7 and keeps going to 7.5.

Now it’s 4.5? Is the difference between Lula and Bolsonaro that Brazillian stocks are either all zeroes or infinity? If I am trading a company with its own fundamentals then falling 7.5 to 4.5 seems like a lot. The stock price moves imply a difference of like Mao and Reagan.

One thing on buying (or selling) after events is it’s almost always better to wait 3 days unless you need to do huge institutional size. I sold my Brazilian shit first day after the first round election because it was up 30% but if I waited 3 days would have gotten 50%. Usually today is not the day to buy.

The stock price moves imply a difference of like Mao and Reagan.

Yeah, because it basically is. In recent decades, avowed socialists in Latin America who come to power “democratically” have a proven track record of ignoring property rights (esp. of foreigners), nationalizing businesses, and redistributing wealth to political insiders. The market is pricing in the (very reasonable, imo) likelihood that Lula will turn out to be another iteration of Chavez or Morales.

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