site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   35005 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 3, 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.

12
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

By more than two-to-one, Americans support U.S. government banning TikTok from Pew Research

More than twice as many Americans support the U.S. government banning TikTok as oppose it (50% vs. 22%), though a sizable share (28%) are not sure, according to a new Pew Research Center survey that comes amid intensifying scrutiny of the Chinese-owned video-sharing app.

Support for a government ban on TikTok is higher among Republicans and independents who lean toward the Republican Party than among Democrats and Democratic leaners (60% vs. 43%). It’s particularly high among conservative Republicans (70%) and less so among moderate or liberal Republicans (46%). Among Democrats, conservatives and moderates are more supportive of a ban than liberals (49% vs. 36%).

Older Americans are much more supportive of banning the platform than younger ones: 71% of those ages 65 and older support it, compared with 54% of those ages 50 to 64 and fewer than half of adults under 50. Those under 30 stand out for being the only age group in which more people oppose banning the platform than support it (46% vs. 29%).

I can't say I'm very surprised but it's more that I assumed it was getting banned either way. I'd be interested to see the trend over time to see if there's been some manufacturing of consent.

I think that sort of support (especially since the GOP is onboard and not playing criticizing) basically gives the government all the cover they need to actually do it but we'll see.

Speaking totally off the cuff, here are some thoughts about why banning tik tok has such wide consensus:

  1. A clear line between users and non users. Full disclosure: I refuse to download tik tok onto my phone, and therefore the only tik toks i see are the ones popular enough to make it onto other platforms. On the other hand, when i talk to people who use tik tok, that often appears to be the only, or primary, platform that they use for online interaction.

This leads to:

  1. A negative impression of tik tok's effects on its users and culture in general. From the non user perspective, tik tok pushes antisocial public behavior, both in terms of public antics and disengagement from social situations. I think there's definitely a bit of maliciousness in banning tik tok where the non users want to confiscate it from the people they perceive as allowing it to ruin society.

But i also thing a strong factor is:

  1. The obviousness of tik tok's product placement. I haven't actually heard anyone else remark on this as I have the above ideas, but for a very long time I have been put off by tik tok's constant marketing and product placement as "the place where everything important is happening" on the radio , on my favorite television shows, and every major website. I also feel like I've noticed that tik tok has no end of eloquent defenders available to push carefully focus-grouped talking points in its defense. For a while it was "tik tok just shows you what you want to see, my feed is just cooking videos" when people objected to the sexual exploitation of minors on the platform. When talk of regulating it emerged, it pivoted to "we need a law against all social media companies invasion of privacy!" And now it's "this bill is worse than the Patriot act and will put you in prison for using a VPN".

I think when you don't use it, it looks like a deliberate hypnotic assault on American society and feels like a platform thats designed to completely supplant the rest of the internet and capture and waste the attention of its users. Americans will embrace whatever tools they can to get rid of it, because its an app from a foreign adversary of America designed to weaken the next generation. The more you look into it, the more apparent that becomes.

because its an app from a foreign adversary of America designed to weaken the next generation.

What’s weakening America is America.

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