This is a megathread for any posts on the conflict between (so far, and so far as I know) Hamas and the Israeli government, as well as related geopolitics. Culture War thread rules apply.
- 1849
- 20
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
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
So you guys do know all these Palestinians will end up in Europe, right?
2.1 million is a lot of refugees. How does that measure up to previous crises, like Syria, etc? Is it effectively the same but all at once or a much bigger number?
Poland alone had more Ukrainian refugees, with about one million still staying right now (depending on how you count you will get different numbers).
Total count of Ukrainian refugees was about 5-6 million, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_refugee_crisis_(2022%E2%80%93present)
Obviously, refugee count is far from only impact. Palestinians are not going to Europe. Unless someone plays 7D chess and really wants right across Europe to win elections.
Voting "right-wing" literally does not do anything in Western Europe. In Eastern-Europe "right-wing" voters still overwhelmingly support fighting Russia on behalf of the EU/NATO while simultaneously asking EU politely to stop sending migrants. The only way out of this endless All-Star loop Europe is stuck in is through violent revolution and rejection of democratic institutions.
Is there something inconsistent about being right-wing and supporting fighting Russia? You would simply be one link in potentially numerous generations of right-wing local nationalists who have supported the same.
From an ethno-nationalist point of view, rule by USSR had much better consequences than rule by EU/NATO-aligned globalists. See this convenient experiment in Germany.
On the other hand, if you're talking about some kind of authoritarianism/freedom axis, surely Europe is becoming more right-wing one migrant at a time. Sharia law soon brothers. Now that's trad.
That is 2011. Any more recent data? Also "no muslims" is only one axis, on many others like "people wishing to change something are not murdered on orders of Moscow/Washington" or ">100 000 dead due to catastrophic economy mismanagement, maybe deliberate murder via economy sabotage" Russia is less rosy.
And "due to USSR we are noticeably poorer so migrants want to migrate elsewhere" is hardly a great incentive to be occupied by Russia again.
USSR's control of Germany ended 20 years prior, I don't see why newer data would change anything. I don't expect East Germany to have diversified faster than West Germany in the last decade, and if it did, I'd expect a good explanation to blame it on the USSR, considering that the very agents responsible for mass immigration to Europe to this day are still waging war against the ghost of the USSR.
People die all the time. Nations die when globalists simultaneously import millions of foreigners and discourage breeding among the natives.
European civilization was explicitly defined by its Christianity according to which poverty is a virtue and excessive wealth a sin, so it's a question of point-of-view. If you want to be more 'trad' and revert to older versions of culture and civilization then this might conflict with it, and higher levels of islamic immigration might actually further your values.
Take a look at Russian demographics, it does not look stellar either.
Starvation and drowning everything in rampant alcoholism is not highly prized by Christianity.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Why do you think the entire European right (apart from some very fringe groups) resisted USSR that strongly for its entire existence, then?
From an actual ethnonationalist point of view, people in Estonia, Latvia and to a lesser extent Lithuania certainly remember that rule by USSR meant a real, existing risk of their nationalities really, genuinely becoming minorities in their titular homelands, as temporarily already happened to the Kazakhs.
Note that in areas closer to Russia also very large part of left opposed USSR.
Yes, certainly, but the point I was answering to specifically referred to the right, and made the strange and ahistorical claim that being opposed to Russia would somehow by itself rended these parties as "not right-wing".
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It's hard to explain. The traditionalist right pretty much died out when the USSR and Americans allied to crush them. Then whatever fringe was left was crushed by a combination of consumerism (industrial society), chemical warfare (contraception), and massive amount of propaganda. Anyone with eyes can see that Western (American) media is a much bigger threat to native cultures than anything coming out of Russia or China. Perhaps because the West is the most effective vehicle of the Industrial Revolution. A less effective ruler can be a good thing, if the ruler's objectives are opposite to the survival of your people.
Yes or they could have been Belgians. I doubt Belgians will exist as an ethnic group in the next 50 years, after so charitably hosting the EU parasite. Meanwhile Poland is just as white as the Nazi ethnic cleansing left it.
That is quite wild claim, given outright attempts to destroy cultures run by both (see also "Ukrainians and Ukraine are fake and never really existed"). Chinese managed to run quite hard destruction attempt on themself and are busy speed running deliberately exploding population pyramid (recently they tried to reverse it, with poor results).
Still less terrible population pyramid than Poland, but we at least have not tried to achieve it deliberately.
And yes, Russia is corrupt and ineffective - but not so much to make them harmless. And Russification was repeatedly attempted by them with various degrees of success.
I am not sure whether they ever existed as ethnic group :)
And that is both false and misleading (Nazis in Poland had very limited opportunity to murder non-white people on account of Poland having even less of them than nowadays - they murdered millions of white people). Hmm, now I wonder how many were murdered due to this.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link