site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4mo ago (text post)   25666 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 1, 2024

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.

Far Right HBD Civil War

Bronze Age Pervert recently xeeted on what he believes in the current infeasibility of HBD politically:

While for the sake of truth I think facts about racial disparities should be discussed, it’s not good at all politically. In fact it’s impossible in the present circumstances. Only a myth of race blindness is workable. You won’t convince some populations that they are inferior by birth and deserve their station in life. You won’t even convince “decent people” from high achieving populations of this. On the other hand discrimination to offset perceived past discrimination or natural inequalities is also felt to be wrong (although I think it would be relatively easy to convince modern populations to accept affirmative action to offset natural inequalities, which is another reason pushing this with a political intention is a big mistake). The only solution in short run is race blindness, stopping and reversing all racialization of politics and society. This isn’t my own preference by the way but a statement on fact. The “HBD position” is an impossibility politically and culturally today. Public hypocrisy is the only way out that will be accepted unless you are ready to go the Nietzsche and Gobineau route (and you are not).

This was controversial with numerous pundits amongst the different spheres of the Right: with Woods, Winegard, and Fuentes having opposing views.

I think the question of politically feasibility of HBD is a point of discussion, in addition to—perhaps more interestingly—the timing of the xeet by Bronze Age Pervert—wat means? Is HBD the path forward? In the chaos of the Isreal-Hamas war and the current anti-woke backlash, is the vitalist Right looking to make themselves more palatable?

BAP is a jewish nationalist who preaches individualism for the goys. His goal is to turn the west into a free market with free movement of people and goods.

The other side are white nationalists who want to preserve European civilization.

BAP would probably not want to see Tel Aviv turned into an Atlanta full of Africans. Diversity for the goyim, nationalism for the jews. Similar to Ben Shapiro who thinks identity politics is lame unless it is for Israel.

-Diversity for the goyim, nationalism for the jews. Similar to Ben Shapiro who thinks identity politics is lame unless it is for Israel.

I wish it was more nuanced than this, but this an accurate heuristic. there is a sort of irony in seeing an American with a Star of David flag and/or Ukraine flag on twitter username accuse someone with a Palestine flag of being anti-American.

BAP is a jewish nationalist who preaches individualism for the goys. His goal is to turn the west into a free market with free movement of people and goods.

The other side are white nationalists who want to preserve European civilization.

The wicked Jewish badwronger vs the righteous good-doer white nationalist.

This is just cheerleading for white nationalism while dunking on the perfidious Jew. Truly content-free other than a big sneer.

No, it points to a bigger trend: nationalism for me, open borders for thee. Ben Shapiro thinks white nationalism is lame while being a hard core zionist. He doesn't actually think identity politics is lame, he just opposes all identity politics instead of his own.

Ben Shapiro thinks white nationalism is lame while being a hard core zionist.

So do and so are most white gentile American conservatives - tens of millions of them - what’s your point?

Most of Alamariu's recent writing on Israel has been strongly negative other than in that he said that Hamas weren't 'bronze age' because they whine to the international community about getting bombed when Israel fights back...which doesn't seem out of line with the rest of his beliefs. The main 'allegation' surrounding his supposed Zionism is that he wore an IDF t-shirt to his college classes to annoy leftist students 20 years ago. That seems pretty embarrassing but I don't think it tells us much.

The other side are wignats like Woods who spend their days crying about Palestinians on Twitter and unironically resharing Finkelstein-type comments about how oppressed they are, which BAP correctly said isn't a very compelling message to most Western conservatives who consider leftist activists, Muslim immigrants and progressives (the rest of the anti-Israel coalition in Western countries) their political foes, not friends.

It is probably different in the US, but in Europe Israel is deeply unpopular among a large part of the right. Israel and the neocons make war, Europe gets flooded with migrants. Borrowing trillions to bomb the middle east, destroy the last of the remnants of the Greek culture in the region, flood Europe with migrants and force feminism on the middle east wasn't popular here. The Palestinians want Palestinians to stay in Palestine, Israel wants a massive refugee crisis on Europe's doorstep.

Israel, apart from having the largest gay parade in the middle east, has worked to destabilize neighbouring countries, finance jihadist groups in Syria and push migrants into Europe. The Israel lobby has been vocally pro diversity, wars in the middle east and immigration. The ADL wasn't exactly on the white nationalist coalition's side. Trying to build a coalition between European nationalists and Israelis is borderline impossible as the two groups have completely different goals. Europeans want Palestinians to stay in Palestine and the middle east to have stable states. Israel wants mass migration from the middle east and a weak Syria/Iraq/lebanon.

As for the Palestinians being weak, they have showed impressive fighting spirit.

In office most European nationalists (eg. Orban) seem to have fine working relationships with Israel. Israel doesn't want Gazans to go to Europe, they just don't want them in Gaza, and are happy to deliver them to anyone who will have them.

In general I don't think it's an important question - outside Britain, France and Russia (in the second, the most prominent nationalist figure is Jewish after Marine Le Pen moved to the center-right, and in the third Putin is quite close with a number of Jews in his inner circle) there are very few Jews in Europe and most will leave quickly to the US or Israel as the Muslim population grows further and attacks on synagogues, Jewish schools and so on increase. There will be very few European Jews left to play any substantial role in the coming cultural conflict between indigenous Europeans and migrant populations from the Islamic world, and many of those who remain will either be politically irrelevant ultra-Orthodox or on the right like Zemmour.

Orban is already sanctioned. He has a small land locked country under immense pressure from abroad. He is forced to make some concessions in order to not end up getting the Belarus treatment.

Israel doesn't want Gazans to go to Europe, they just don't want them in Gaza, and are happy to deliver them to anyone who will have them.

The reality has been that Israel has pushed hard against Syria and we got flooded with migrants. Pushing millions of migrants into another part of the Middle east is destabilizing and greatly increases the risk of them comming hear.

Ben Gvir, an Israeli minister, is openly talking about creating a mega-refugee crisis on Europe's doorstep: https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/ben-gvir-war-an-opportunity-to-encourage-migration-from-gaza/

After decades of Israel Palestine conflict, it is clear that the result has been more migrants to Europe.

and many of those who remain will either be politically irrelevant ultra-Orthodox or on the right like Zemmour.

So far the Jewish population of Europe has been overwhelmingly pro open borders and diversity. For such a small group, they have been incredibly overrepresented in promoting mass immigration.

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