site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   5553 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 9, 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.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang caught having affair with Chinese spy.

There was some discussion of this in the Sunday thread, but I think this is a big deal worth a top-level post.

The woman, Alice Huang (no relation), is an executive at Singapore-based cloud computing company Megaspeed. The official story from Nvidia, up until last week, was that this was a totally normal nothing-to-see-here business relationship with a client. Jensen himself now seems to admit this is not the case.

Jensen has been strongly opposed to chip export controls for some time. No doubt prosaic conserns about margins and market expansion were a major factor, but now we have to wonder how much corruption, blackmail, and CCP blackops might have played a role. There have been rumors of... irregularities regarding some Nvidia chip shipments to Asia. There is new reporting today that Nvidia itself intervened to squash a Commerce Department investigation into Megaspeed.

I feel like the board has to fire him after this, but on the other hand it seems almost unthinkable. Imagine Apple firing Steve Jobs. There might be pressure from investors to keep him on. It will be interesting to see how the National Security apparatus responds to such a massive persistant vulnerability if it comes to that.

So, I'm mostly just seeing a lot of jokes and memes about this. Which, understandable, it's a juicy scandal.

But one semi serious response that I saw on Twitter got me thinking. Is this just an inherent weakness in all men? An unpatchable security flaw? We're already vulnerable to just normal human temptation. What are we supposed to do when foreign governments target us with professional seductresses? Should all men in critical positions get castrated for national security?

Should all men in critical positions get castrated for national security?

No, they should be married. Our ancestors understood this.

He's already married.

Then prosecute him for adultery.

How many captains of industry did our ancestors prosecute for adultery?

For actions committed in foreign countries lacking adultery laws?

I mean casual side prostitution was a lot more normalized in essentially every Western society until the last 100 years or so. The current model with Japan having a ton of random prostitution/prostitution-lite options but also a way-lower divorce rate than Western countries since it's just kinda is what it is societally is how most of human history functioned.

Huang (J.) could have had discreet escorts if he wanted. He didn't, he was targetted (allegedly) and fell for the romance scam. This is the flip side of why "don't have affairs at work" is a good rule. Presumably the thing started with an approach about doing business together, then propinquity and working off similarity in backgrounds (son of Taiwanese immigrants, she's Singaporean or at least based in Singapore) to let sympathy build and then attraction.

Won't matter if the guy is single, married, in an open relationship/poly, wife accepts that he has mistresses, wife accepts that he hires escorts, guy is gay - unless it's strict adoption of The Mike Pence Rule, older men in positions of power and influence will always be vulnerable to younger, attractive women (or men for the gays) flattering their vanity and getting them to think with their dick.

EDIT: Not to sound too cynical, but all the discussions we've had on here about the difference between men and women when it comes to dating, sex, marriage and the rest of it - come on, men are easy. Men generally have a higher sex drive and are interested in novelty and not interested in turning down "this chick will sleep with me if I let her". Men generally seem to have less difficulty justifying affairs if married with "it's just sex, it's you I really love" or "men have affairs to save their marriages, women have affairs to end their marriages" thinking.

Sleeping with a professional prostitute while married is a lot less socially harmful than keeping a mistress, which in turn is less harmful than leaving your wife to marry your mistress.

Which in turn is less harmful than leaving your wife to marry a prostitute.

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