site banner
PaperclipPerfector  11mo ago (text post)   38182 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 5, 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 New Old Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

what is the name of the chap that killed Fafnir? What did he look like? What was his culture?

Seigfried killed Fafnir. He was described as tall and fair, but that is not the same as "white", plenty of Indians can be said to be fair as well. He almost certainly (if he had existed) was white though. His culture was Norse.

Fafnir was a Germanic flightless dragon, as you can probably tell, the concept came from Norse/Frankish tales.

I am not denying that Tolkien wrote LOTR to be a tale of the British Isles, however the culture he wrote it for is long dead now, modern white people are vestigial hangers on who have perverted the thing that Tolkien wanted to embellish and preserve until it became a crude mockery of itself. Modern whites can't claim that the butchering that has been going on affects them any more than it affects black people, and if they are complaining about the old culture itself being desecrated then we can safely say their own actions have caused far far more lasting and irreparable damage to it than any number of race swaps ever will.

  • -17

the culture he wrote it for is long dead

Spoken like someone who has never left a city. Believe me, Anglos are real. They still exist despite the best attempts of the modernists you are desperately trying to conflate them with.

But even if I didn't have my lying eyes, "let us dance on the grave of the English" doesn't exactly strike me as a moral position. And as a Frenchman this is a more costly position to take for me than you may imagine.

Vandalism and spite are, as Tolkien is so keen to teach, attributes of evil. Why destroy even if all that care are long dead? Why destroy?

modern white people are vestigial hangers on who have perverted the thing that Tolkien wanted to embellish and preserve until it became a crude mockery of itself

If 'modern white people' are perverting so many things, why are you laying into them for trying to at least leave Tolkien unmolested ?

If, in your view, for once they're trying to do something good (assuming conserving being the opposite of perverting), yet you still attack them.

I have a hard time understanding your motives here.

Do you really believe critical theory is essentially white and was willed into existence collectively, and that it wasn't a deliberate, radical move designed to subvert the western bourgeois culture and customs ?

whites can't claim that the butchering that has been going on affects them any more than it affects black people,

Can you provide any example of 'black culture' that has been re-written or remade to be palatable for modern sensibilities ? I honestly have a hard time thinking of any black writer apart from Octavia Butler.

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