site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2yr ago (text post)   33897 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 10, 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.

13
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Amnesty International

Why are they painting benches in randome eastern european towns?

It's a capital city with ca 2 million people, it's not like a random Eastern European town. Amnesty is an international organization with its own Hungarian branch, after all.

The description of the district shows it's dominated by the Hungarian opposition and generally seems like it's probably the hipster district of Budapest, so the local public administration might as well have invited them.

They notably got in quite a bit of hot water last year over accusing Ukraine of committing war crimes by defending populated areas.

It was not simply for defending populated areas. It was for fighting from within them. Doing this legitimized Russia in bombing those areas, because it stops being a war crime to attack civilian-occupied areas unprovoked when you have credible reason to believe in potential enemy presence there (i.e. dozens of social media videos and reports of Ukrainians fighting from within those areas).

A better question is, why do random Eastern European towns let an NGO (aka a lobbying group) do anything whatsoever to public property?

Probably for the same reason the Texas democrats insist on nominating unelectable flashy progressives for statelevel offices- Budapest is not in agreement with the rest of the country, and outside support is conditioned on stuff like this.

I guess it depends on how these things work. Do NGOs tend to hire locals? I'm imagining the modal E. European townspeople can't just go "it's because of those Americans that rolled into town" in cases like these.

Imagine you were a donor, thinking you were sending money to help refugees at the Thai border or women in Saudi Arabia. And then there's this.

It's probably not actually a huge burden in terms of financial resources, but the time and energy being spent to antagonize locals instead of something core to its mission is shocking.

Honestly the donors probably love this. Anything to paint the other side as anti gay bigots likely plays well.

Rhetorical question, Amnesty has been on the side of the devils since inception.

To foment a Color Revolution

I groaned in a moderate amount of pain.

I was literally just making a pun on the word “color” because of the fact that paint is involved.

God fucking damn it

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