Live data from Hacker News

At liberal tech companies, those who disagree on politics say they’re isolated

bloomberg.com

251–260 of 418 posts

Re: At liberal tech companies, those who disagree on politics say they’re isolated

#251
“Before it was, ‘I don’t agree with you,’ but now it has evolved into this new thing that is much more aggressive, ‘don’t even say something that is counter to what I believe,’”

This sums up rather well what I believe is a new era of righteous indignation in America. This is not isolated to just America, or Americans, but it's not something we've really had to deal with before. That righteous indignation manifests itself in how we react to people we disagree with, whether it's over a parking space, or something someone else does somewhere in the world that we don't like. The new belief is not "I disagree with you, go away" it's now "I disagree with you, and I'm going to do everything in my power to hurt you, destroy your reputation, get you fired from your job, and cause you as much pain as I can, likely from a distance." It borders on a collective superiority complex.

As someone who has worked in Congress, now as a lobbyist, I think this began with the leadership of both parties. No longer do our elected officials find way to reach common ground on public issues. Instead, both parties, their leadership, and through their public relations and voter base, have turned to a tactic of "attack, defame, and destroy." Washington has become dysfunctional because of this righteous indignation, and it has permeated down to everyone else, made exponentially possible by the internet.

I wish there was an easy solution, but I don't see one.

Re: At liberal tech companies, those who disagree on politics say they’re isolated

#252
post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it knee-jerk and shallow? If you voted for Trump you either directly support Trump's social policies or you don't think they were abhorrent enough to not vote for him.

I'm not pro-life, but I feel like if I thought abortion was actually murder of babies , I think I'd probably hold my nose and vote for whoever had the best chance of ending that practice. (Though, I also believe that would be Clinton--banning abortion is less viable than proving effective sex ed, and probably not hugely more effective.) Similarly, if I had spent much time in Libya, I might consider holding my nose an…

> But it doesn't--it could just mean you think the other candidate had stuff that was more disqualifying.

That seems like a false dichotomy. There were third party candidates. Plus, you can always choose not to vote.

Re: At liberal tech companies, those who disagree on politics say they’re isolated

#253

I grew up in Texas but worked in Silicon Valley for a few years. One of the toughest adjustments was going from a small conservative town to a major liberal populace. It was astonishing the number of people who got angry _at me_ for having a different opinion then they did. At one workplace I saw two coworkers get into a fist fight because the liberal was "offended" that the conservative differed on a viewpoint. Go t…

> Go to Texas and I'm sure you can find the opposite if you are looking for it I went to Texas and wasn't looking for it - but the first bar I walked into had photos of Obama and Hillary duct taped to the urinal for people to aim at :P

They'll also do that kind of thing with Texas A&M logos, so don't read too much into it.

Re: At liberal tech companies, those who disagree on politics say they’re isolated

#254
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hear welding is an in-demand industry and I bet they'll find more receptivity to their viewpoints there. I know what point you're trying to make here, and it's true that there may be more receptivity, but welders are more likely to be, say, pro union than your run of the mill SV bro. Your point about the "safe spaces" is hilarious!

Yes, I was mostly being flippant there. I've known several welders and iron workers and they tend to mostly be apolitical and when they have opinions they're a fair mix of both left and right. But welders is what came to mind first when I was thinking of "stereotypically right wing jobs". Whoops.

lol. While I get your point, I would say it's not quite true. At least in Canada. Source: father's a 2nd-generation pipe fitter at a large refinery. The guys that work those kinds of rough jobs tend to be a bit more rough around the edges, but tend to support more left-wing policies. They just feel the tax bite more than people like us who can take a "work from home" day, because they have to put a lot of themselves into their work every day. But most union-member tradespersons tend to support our public healthcare, public works, view the company's motives with skepticism, and have an arguably higher degree of respect for human life than a 3rd-generation white collar worker. (They need to, because their coworkers can die if they don't)

But like I said, that's in Canada. I can't speak for the US.

Re: At liberal tech companies, those who disagree on politics say they’re isolated

#255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

judging someone by the sole data point of their choice in the voting booth, without knowing reasons for it, is one of the most stupid kind of thinking imaginable I'd call that holding them accountable and I only know how they voted because they told me. Also, I'd put hating people for the color of their skin, the sexuality, their religion, ... as much much stupider.

> I'd call that holding them accountable You only get to do that after you understand their reasons, which you can then judge. > and I only know how they voted because they told me It doesn't work like that. People don't generally run around, telling everyone who they voted for. It usually comes up in conversations, where the person who divulges their choice don't expect to get hated for it. > Also, I'd put hating pe…

Actually it does work like that.

Your conversation example is basically saying that even understanding your reasons that I'm supposed to give you a pass because ... because what?

As for stupider, the color of your skin or your sexuality aren't choices. Whether you voted for Trump is. Holding someone accountable for their choices isn't stupid. Hating them for their race, sexuality, ... is.

Your equivocation isn't getting anywhere.

Re: At liberal tech companies, those who disagree on politics say they’re isolated

#256

I grew up in Texas but worked in Silicon Valley for a few years. One of the toughest adjustments was going from a small conservative town to a major liberal populace. It was astonishing the number of people who got angry _at me_ for having a different opinion then they did. At one workplace I saw two coworkers get into a fist fight because the liberal was "offended" that the conservative differed on a viewpoint. Go t…

Back in university, I had a flatmate that was pro-Bush. He wasn't unintelligent. He was getting his masters. He was a good guy and generally progressive in his views. He actually had pretty well laid out arguments as far as what he saw as best for the country and policy with the continuation of the Bush administration over Kerry. Both myself and my other housemates didn't understand it at the time, but I didn't lose…

> I currently hold a controversial opinion myself, that the parties are essentially the same and the elections simply do not matter. I do not think anything would be different under either potential candidate.

That's a bit of a point towards what libertarians and conservatives (but, to be clear, not alt-righters) think. If fewer issues were national and more were left up to individuals, even, you wouldn't have to lament what the national government does. You could move to a more sane place. And your opinion would matter more in a smaller jurisdiction.

Interestingly, we're seeing this symptom happening more in tech companies, which are not the government but they certainly govern in some respects, at least the things they are responsible for. There is starting to be appetite in conservative and libertarian circles for discussion about what to do about unelected corporate bureaucracies having this sort of power.

Re: At liberal tech companies, those who disagree on politics say they’re isolated

#257

Despite the many upvotes, numerous comments, and recent post time, this submission no longer appears on the front page. I don't see a "submission flagged" or "removed" indicator. Would a moderator be able to tell us what's up?

133 points in 2 hours and it's not anywhere on the front page. Meanwhile, the current top post has 97 points in 3 hours.

What is going on?

Re: At liberal tech companies, those who disagree on politics say they’re isolated

#258

I've voted for GWB twice, Obama once and opted out for his reelection. I consider myself an overall conservative, albeit fairly liberal on some issues. I too have faced condescension and derision for some viewpoints I've expressed, and that is annoying and I think it is a general problem with US politics. But Trump is different. He's incompetent. He's hotheaded. He's terrible for diplomacy, and has alienated many of…

I really don't think this is helpful or very HN like. You may hold all those opinions about him, and you may be right, but 60 million+ people voted for him, just like 60+ million people voted for the other puppet. It doesn't mean either of those groups is stupid. And it's important to note much of our perception is based off the particular news media we watch and they way they cut up content. If you go back to the Bu…

I suspect you and I agree far more than we disagree on politics. There was a clear reason I opted against voting for Obama a second time, and you've already articulated half of it. I'm not worried about domestic policy...it should be pretty clear by now that Trump (like most presidents) has no real control over domestic policy. And I'm well aware of how media shapes our opinions, often intentionally.

But at the expense of Godwin's law, Hitler was democratically elected, and that was still bad for the human race. At some point, popularity has to stop being an excuse for acceptability. I'm worried about the fact that we elected a bewilderingly incompetent and hotheaded abusive tyrant and put him in charge of the executive branch and the world's most overfunded military. I'm worried that he can choose judges, sign executive orders, pardon felons, control our borders. He's so so bad for our country and for our world that I've participated in a practice I regularly decry: I voted against him, for someone I would otherwise never vote for.

At some point we have to say that that he is not okay, and that point should not be defined by his popularity but by simple moral reflection. I regularly laugh with pity at the imagined moral superiority of side-pickers, and yet I will choose a side here. I don't condemn people who vote party lines, and I don't condemn people that have ideological differences from me, but I also don't regret shaming and condemning people who vote for destructive evil, whether that evil comes in the form of Andrew Jackson, Adolf Hitler, Recep Erdogan, or Donald Trump. It needs to happen.

Re: At liberal tech companies, those who disagree on politics say they’re isolated

#259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion, some of the policies of the Republican Party seem downright evil to me. Restrict the civil rights of gays and Muslims (Trump himself stated that he was going to start a Muslim ban, he asked people to make it legal but the intent was very clear and stated by Trump several times: Muslim ban). They also want to restrict information on the internet which seems pretty evil to me (modern day book banning). T…

I don't agree with those policies, but can you imagine any non-evil reason a rational person would hold those beliefs?

Logical reason for wanting to restrict the rights of gay people and ban all Muslims? I'm all ears, I literally cannot think of a rational reason for supporting such policies.

Re: At liberal tech companies, those who disagree on politics say they’re isolated

#260
post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not pro-life, but I feel like if I thought abortion was actually murder of babies , I think I'd probably hold my nose and vote for whoever had the best chance of ending that practice. (Though, I also believe that would be Clinton--banning abortion is less viable than proving effective sex ed, and probably not hugely more effective.) Similarly, if I had spent much time in Libya, I might consider holding my nose an…

> But it doesn't--it could just mean you think the other candidate had stuff that was more disqualifying. That seems like a false dichotomy. There were third party candidates. Plus, you can always choose not to vote.

There was no pro-life candidate on the ballot that wasn't Trump.
Post reply on HN