site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   27729 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 11, 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.

6
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don't see how an unhinged teacher screaming threats at a student is an "escalation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."

Nor does it seem worthy of a national news story. And no, I doubt a Palestinian teacher threatening to cut off a Jewish student's head would make CNN or NYTimes either. (Fox, maybe.)

Nor does it seem worthy of a national news story.

A student hung a Palestinian flag on a Menorah for like 30 seconds at Yale. It got picked up by NYT, AP, CNN, and many more. This story with the Middle School teacher has more of the trappings of a national news story, a teacher threatening to kill and behead a middle school student is extremely unusual and certainly a much bigger crime against society than a milquetoast protest on a college campus, which is now being investigated by police as a "desecration" and hate crime.

The teacher was arrested (for "terrorism"). Highly visible protests in the midst of an ongoing public conflict are much more likely to attract media attention (indeed, that is their purpose) than one unhinged teacher screaming at a student in bumfuck Georgia.

Where could an Israeli flag be placed that would cause a similar media reaction, with police and federal authorities launching "desecration" and hate crime investigations? I think you are bending over backwards to not acknowledge a double standard:

Senator Richard Blumenthal, who is Jewish, called the incident an act of hate and described his father’s escape from Germany in 1935.

“It may look like a prank,” he said appearing at a news conference in New Haven on Monday. “It may look like a joke. But it couldn’t be more serious because it is the mockery and desecration of a profoundly important religious symbol.”

A bigger question is, if this is a desecration, then why are these profoundly important religious symbols being displayed on public land? How is this not a state establishment of religion? If the government posts profoundly important religious symbols and then persecutes protestors of that symbol for desecration and hate crimes, and it becomes a National News story with lawmakers and institutions all falling on the side of protecting the sacredness of the symbol that is being displayed on public land across the entire country (with no equivalent Christian or Muslim symbol, I might add, and during one of the most important holidays on the Christian calendar), how much room exactly do you have to deny a double-standard in the treatment of Jews versus Palestinians in our media and legal apparatus?

Where could an Israeli flag be placed that would cause a similar media reaction, with police and federal authorities launching "desecration" and hate crime investigations? I think you are bending over backwards to not acknowledge a double standard:

I think if someone plastered Israeli flags over a bunch of mosques it would get some attention. But as far as double standards, yes, the American public is generally more sympathetic to Israelis than to Palestinians. This isn't a puzzler, nor is it evidence of Jews controlling the media.

A bigger question is, if this is a desecration, then why are these profoundly important religious symbols being displayed on public land?

Crosses and nativity creches are also frequently displayed on public land. It is not prohibited to display religious symbols on public land - you just can't give preference to a particular religion.

If the government posts profoundly important religious symbols and then persecutes protestors of that symbol for desecration and hate crimes,

Let me know when the student who hung the Palestinian flag on a menorah indeed gets prosecuted for "descration" or "hate crimes." A senator performing outrage (and probably feeling some genuine outrage) is pretty weak sauce, as ZOG accusations go.

Stick "stochastic" in front of it, Amadan, and it's a phrase I'm seeing sprinkled everywhere about - well, I'm not entirely sure what, it has something to do with voting Republican?

Stochastic describes something random, involving chance or probability.

Terrorism involves an unlawful use of violence or intimidation to further political, social, or ideological goals.

Stochastic harm occurs when the cause (hazard) and its effect (harm) are indirectly linked by a probabilistic relationship. The idea of stochastic harm was first published in 1978, it originally applied to the unintended negative effects of medical procedures using ionizing radiation, such as radiation therapy for cancer when the treatment causes another type of cancer. The term "stochastic harm" has also been generalized to describe harm related to environmental problems such as climate change and some types of disinformation.

Under that definition, I think threatening to slit someone's throat and cut their head off does count as "intimidation".

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