site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   37980 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 27, 2023

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.

11
Top Bottom New Old Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

And so, you are proposing that he'd fight - Republicans. A brilliant strategy.

Yeah, interesting that the suggested tactic for Desantis, who has achieved massive success by directly going after Democratic malfeasance and punching back against lefties on social issues, is to... pander heavily to Democratic voters.

I mean yeah he may have to slide towards the middle for the general, and as @Rov_scam has now helpfully noted he has the tactical ability to do so by pointing at certain parts of his record.

But to follow this suggested strategy would effectively throw away the entire persona he's crafted AND suborn himself to the very narrative he's aiming to overthrow or at least divert.

"Pump up your reputation for being Cathedral-friendly and promise to follow Cathedral-friendly policy suggestions, and then hope the Cathedral lets you win."

And it's not like Republicans didn't try exactly the same strategy before. There was Romney. There was McCain. Both were duly declared literally Hitlers and both lost. But of course, true pandering to socialists has never been tried yet.

That's arguably the real elephant in the room.

Trump was in many ways a result of a repeated failed strategy to moderate the message, then getting shellacked anyway.

Desantis seems to be pulling off the impossible. Someone who appeases the GOPe whilst actually engaging in red meat culture war policies that should attract the base too.

The thing worth admitting is that it's unclear if he can attract moderates while being called "fascist" by most of the media at once, but early signs are promising.

Being called "fascist" by most of the media at once is a given, comes with being a Republican candidate, and has been so since "fascist" has been a thing (really, it's amazing how fast this word came into use in US politics - even before WW2!) - so, since there were Republicans elected since then, it's possible to deal with it successfully.

I'm pretty sure DeSantis knows that it is unwise to take tactical advice from one's enemies. In fact, him knowing this is a large part of what differentiates him (and Trump) from the run-of-the-mill GOP candidate.

That's been consistent, yeah. By all accounts he seems to have a crack team (as much as politics allows these days) who are loyal enough to not leak things and know who the enemy is and to disregard enemy input entirely.

The broad rule to refuse any sort of interview or interaction with 'non-friendly' (read: actively hostile) media outlets is a good example. Basically prevents anyone from becoming at all dependent on such outlets for coverage, and probably reduces the risk that anyone on his team might end up angling for a spot at such a network.

He runs what could be the very definition of a 'tight ship' compared to Trump's leaky tugboat.

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