site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3yr ago (text post)   35653 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 17, 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.

8
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

But, I as I am sure you know, many people -- especially older people in places like Missouri -- are more fearful of young black males than of other people

I mean, it's not for no reason. There have been repeated pogroms of older white people by influxes of younger black populations that have been totally ignored by institutions that have turned a blind eye towards the horrors this older generations must now suffer. At one point another poster shared many, many excerpts from one such study about it. I wish I had kept a bookmark for it. Maybe said poster will crop back up and repost it.

ChatGPT: There is a reason for this. Institutions have ignored the repeated attacks on older white people by younger black populations. Another user previously shared excerpts from a study about this issue. I regret not saving it. Hopefully, that user will return and share it again.

I mean, it's not for no reason.

Yes, that's what I said.

There have been repeated pogroms of older white people

I don't know that the use of terms like "pogrom" to refer to the phenomenon to which you refer gives me much confidence that you are interested in engaging seriously with the very real issues raised by this incident, rather than being interested in engaging in the culture war.

I would think the violence is different in character.

Pogroms were more coordinated than the factors which led to white flight. Ethnic cleansing was the goal, not a side effect. In contrast, white Americans were running from urban decay and opportunistic crime rather than any particular animus.

@WhiningCoil’s examples upthread fit this mold. Arrests, robberies, a general sense of unease. Under these circumstances, I too would want to get the hell out. But I find it categorically different than personally being targeted for my race.

Well, lets compare some historical pogroms to, what I would claim, are more contemporary pogroms.

For, wikipedia.

A pogrom (Russian: погро́м) is a violent riot incited with the aim of massacring or expelling an ethnic or religious group

Pulled at random, the Warsaw Pogrom, 1881

on 25 December 1881 the outbreak of panic after a false warning of fire in the crowded Holy Cross Church resulted in the deaths of twenty-nine persons in a stampede. It was believed that the false alarm was raised by pickpockets, who used the ruse to allow them to rob people during the panic. A crowd gathered on the scene of the event and some unknown persons started to spread a rumour, which subsequently proved to be unfounded, that two Jewish pickpockets had been caught in the church.

The mob began to attack Jews, Jewish stores, businesses, and residences in the streets adjoining the Holy Cross Church.[2] The riots in Warsaw continued for three days, until Russian authorities (who controlled the police as well as military in the city) intervened, arresting 2,600 people. During the Warsaw pogrom two people were left dead and 24 injured. The pogrom also left about a thousand Jewish families financially devastated.

I mean, I don't see how you could read that and not see the parallels to the devastation wrought by BLM riots in the aftermath of the "Hands up Don't Shoot" lie. Or the city blocks in Minneapolis sacked and razed as thoroughly as anything I'd ever seen depicted in sacks of cities in antiquity, or the aftermath of total war bombing runs in WW2. Or the interviews with the hapless residents who lost everything sobbing and destitute. Or the calls to specifically target white people that were broadcast far and wide, albeit tuned to specific audiences to try to hide the intent. I mean, on the numbers alone, at least as people died or were injured in the Minneapolis BLM riots as the Warsaw Pogrom.

  1. Inciting incident

  2. Rumors blaming a minority

  3. Mass violence against alleged perpetrators

  4. Members of minority flee in aftermath

BLM is a terrible fit to this model. You’ve reversed the majority and minority. There was no rumor mill about the inciting act, just disagreement over whether it was warranted. The violence was indiscriminate, no pun intended, and definitely not a plan to push White Americans out.

You’ve reversed the majority and minority.

I see no mention of minority/majority in the wiki definition of pogrom. Merely that it is a riot incited against another ethnic or religious group. So I need not have reversed anything, as it doesn't apply.

Okay, so BLM is supposed to be an anti-White pogrom? Anti-Christian?

My point is that it was indiscriminate violence. Fuck that QuikTrip, fuck that courthouse. The closest thing to a specific group targeted was the police, which are neither an ethnicity nor a religion.

I specifically linked to calls to violence against white people.

Just because the cleaned up, sterilized, MSN "whitewash" stripped it of it's racial character, doesn't mean it can't be found in the direct sources.

Somehow I doubt actual historical pogroms were immune from indiscriminate violence as well. It's a fucking riot. Collateral damage happens.

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