site banner
PaperclipPerfector  10mo ago (text post)   29197 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 31, 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.

It's also clear that there is value in excluding certain people from public spaces. In the extreme, if violent felons are allowed free reign, society as we know it couldn't function.

All the US has to do is send the problem people to prison or otherwise relocate them. It really isn't that hard. There's no rule of the universe that demands open-air drug markets and massive colonies of rowdy homeless shitting up the richest cities in the world. In the Philadelphia video there are all these people saying 'it was never like this under Communism' or 'even in El Salvedor people had their dignity'... This is an American problem that America can choose to solve.

Is it really a huge strain on a $26 trillion economy to build some more prisons, especially considering the gain in rehabilitating urban centres? Combating two great powers on the other side of the world is easy - but laying down some cement and cubicles is hard? Or if prisons are too hard, they could try caning. Singapore knows a lot about running safe cities and combating drugs, the US should try copying their notes.

If everyone is expected to walk and take public transit, there still must be practical ways for average-status people to exclude low-status people

I've used public transport for over a decade in Australia, there are plenty of people wearing suits on the bus. We simply don't have a systemic problem with our public transport system being a playground for illicit drug users because we choose to suppress it.

All the US has to do is send the problem people to prison

Is it really a huge strain on a $26 trillion economy to build some more prisons

America already has more prisons than the countries which don't have these problems - the problem is that you guys need more and better cops to make sure that the right people are in those prisons for the right reasons. (Right reasons is particularly important, because it generates an impact by deterrence as well as incapacitation).

caning

I honestly think that beating/flogging petty criminals and then releasing them would be better than the jail/prison revolving door that petty criminals wind up in. People that fuck up once or twice learn not to do that and can go back to work reasonably fast; even the hardened criminals at least don't spend a bunch of time in Criminal School.

Is it really a huge strain on a $26 trillion economy to build some more prisons, especially considering the gain in rehabilitating urban centres? Combating two great powers on the other side of the world is easy - but laying down some cement and cubicles is hard? Or if prisons are too hard, they could try caning. Singapore knows a lot about running safe cities and combating drugs, the US should try copying their notes.

Those things are extremely hard, harder than going to the Moon, not because of resource constraints, but because of political opposition.

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