site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2yr ago (text post)   33280 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 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.

I don't think there are any particular reasons to believe PF are "feds" (presumably meaning: led by federal informants?) beyond them being a group that does IRL protests.

The issue is that their uniform looks like the stereotype for "off duty cop" or "soldier in civilian clothes" and they would show up with riot shields out of a police catalog when they first started.

I mean that and they seem almost universally in the kind of shape that you’d expect from cops or feds — the median American is overweight and not fit, the median member of PF is fit, and looks like they spend significant time in the gym lifting. They’re also remarkably clean cut and clean shaven for civilians. In short, not only is their equipment very cop like, but their demeanor and appearance is very similar to military feds and police.

A much simpler explanation is they explicitly ask their members to look good and work out because they want to seem optical or w/e

That used to be a tactic of the OG natsoc's where they specifically tailored their clothes, put the fitter, taller more attractive men in the front of their parade/protest groups and when producing video of events like rallies used some camera tricks and staging to keep putting the hero prop level attendees in view with the more typical extras in the back out of focus.

Exactly. The demographics of a real right wing fringe group are going to look a lot more like this than this.

They're clearly selecting members to go out and protest based on fitness, though? All of the 'PF are feds' arguments just seem like a cross between conspiracy and cope (not parent specifically though)

I just never see anything approaching that level of organisation in other groups. There's someone with the job of going and reviewing members to make sure they're in the right physical shape to protest. There's someone ensuring they have matching outfits. There's someone procuring matching riot shields. When the protest is done they all leave together at the same time at the same subway station, with a police escort the whole way.

This is just completely foreign to any experience of politics I've had. Even mainstream parties attract a ton of crazies. Niche groups are overflowing with them. Things are haphazardly thrown together, individual members go and get arrested for absurd nonsense acts. But these guys have money and structure.

I just don't buy that it's genuine. It's a law enforcement trap to suck in the nazi-curious and catch them before they do anything violent.

I just never see anything approaching that level of organisation in other groups

If you take a dozen or so samples from most distributions, you'll find a few outliers. The modern far-right has a strong emphasis on physical appearance and masculinity and aesthetics. It makes sense that some of them would come together to form a group. That, notably, is not true about mainstream democrats or republicans. If you have a hundred thousand people in the US who watch webms of nazi rallies approvingly (which there are! Hitler is becoming very popular online), you can probably scrap together a few thousand of them who'll want to imitate it, a few hundred of which will be fit.

See also the Ambercrombie and Snitch meme from 2021.

This reminds me. I need to go visit my local police surplus store. I’m told it’s one of the best places to get a well-used Remington.

Why do you want a well-used remington?

Because the ones produced throughout the 2000s and 2010s (they haven't produced any in 2020 because they went bankrupt, of course) have shit quality control and the earlier ones don't?

Not that I'd ever recommend a Remington shotgun even with the best QC in the world because their design is sub-par compared to Mossberg's (safety location is better, consumable small parts can more easily be replaced if you need to, no stupid loading door) unless you want a detachable magazine (where it's the 870 that's the better design) or want a pistol grip (Mossberg's tang safety is in the wrong place for that), but y'know.

They're priced accordingly, and I don't yet own a shotgun.

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