site banner
PaperclipPerfector  8mo ago (text post)   26479 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 25, 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.

7
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yea the US is not at war, weird how we still end up spending on this garbage. Why don't the people on this forum that are so concerned about Ukraine ship themselves there? They are taking foreign recruits.

Even if you could point to people on this forum who are "so concerned about Ukraine" - which I do not think you can; "more sympathetic to Ukraine than to Russia" does not mean one's heart bleeds for Ukraine - this kind of "why don't you ship yourself there and fight?" sneer is not an intelligent or civil rebuttal to any actual argument.

This place is beyond bleeding heart, 90% of the pro-ukraine "arguments" are just dressed up feelings with little to no reasoning.

Russia is going to invade Poland and Germany and eventually the US if we don't do something! -anxiety

We are destroying our great enemy for a pittance! -hate and phobia

Something Chamberlain yada yada appeasement. -anxiety

etc.

There is nothing to argue with, when people are being emotional you can only reach them with emotion. I find shaming them works well.

Edit: but I will take the hint and timeout myself from this topic. No more posting in this or the other thread on the same topic for me.

99% arguments against involvement in Ukraine that I've seen here are based on greed ("why my tax dollars?") and hate/phobia ("serves those GAE Europeans right"), so I'm afraid the pro-Ukrainians got you beat here.

More than 1% of the arguments against involvement are due to not wanting nuclear war, toe-to-toe with the Ruskies.

Personally, I'm mostly for giving money and materiel, but that keeps me up at night.

By the standards of the poster above me as I see them, that's an emotional argument too. Can you really have any idea of the odds that Kremlin will dare go MAD, let alone assume they're high enough to fear?

Just to be clear, I'm claiming that >1% of the arguments against are fear of nuclear war. That's not a probability, it's counting what people are saying.

Alright, fair enough, I failed to count that.

Sure, you can argue that funding Ukraine's war effort is not worth it for the US, but it seems spurious to argue it's an unreasonable amount on the basis of comparisons to defense budgets in countries that aren't at war.

I guess it wasn't clear but that first bit should be read with a /s. I'm making fun of the idea that the US isn't at war. The US is eternally at war. Which is why the "defense" budget is so much higher than everyone else's.

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