Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 418 posts

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

#401

Post by bb88 »

didibus wrote: post #281
bb88 wrote: post #271

Why is this news? If you have an unpopular opinion, you're going to be ostracized. If you oppose Obamacare in SF, you're gonna be ostracized. If you support gun control in Odessa, you're gonna be ostracized. You're hired to work. Not to share your opinion with your co-workers. Why is this so hard for people to understand?

I agree with you, but I also feel some opinions sometime reflect into your own personality, and you're identity can be constructed around it. Humour can easily be racist or sexist for example. Now all of a sudden, you're just being yourself, making a joke you think people will laugh at and like you cause you're funny, but suddenly that backfires. Now, it's not just your opinions, even if you changed your opinions, th…

That very reason is why no one talks about trying to change personalities.

Instead we talk about changing behaviors.

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

#402

Post by AmIFirstToThink »

closeparen wrote: post #380
AmIFirstToThink wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They want to deport kids who have lived in the US their whole lives through no fault of their own. Why are all white people being asked to pay for some white slave owners? Why are they being punished for the sins of their forefathers? No white person alive now, ever owned slaves, it is illegal. No black person alive now, was ever enslaved, it is illegal. Are you giving a clean sheet to all white "kids" because slave…

Do you seriously think there's any moral correspondence whatsoever between trying to make a living in the US against its will, and owning/importing slaves?

A person alive today, who happens to be white, never owned slaves in his life. Why is left hell bent on punishing that white person for some crimes that that person's ancestors, may have done. Most whites never owned slaved even in those days. It was white people who fought for and paid with their lives ending slavery.

Left wants to hold all whites responsible for crimes of slavery.

Left wants to give clean sheet to DACA recipients for crimes of their parents.

Why do you want to hold kids responsible for parents crimes when it comes to white people?

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

#403

Post by AmIFirstToThink »

zimpenfish wrote: post #393
AmIFirstToThink wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Arguably "good people" don't support nor vote for an individual who openly brags about assaulting women... If you take that stance, then your options are: 1. 45% of the voting people in USA support sexually assaulting women. Are you OK with that understanding? Do you not find something unsettling about saying 45% people in USA are OK for sexually assaulting women? The same conservative family oriented people, the sa…

> If Trump's audio conservation had not leaked, he would have won by even larger margin. Unless you can show some evidence for this, it's just an unprovable counterfactual and completely useless.

You looking for sauce? Sauce is in Hillary's bag. You are welcome.

In other words, if you don't agree, you can safely ignore the comment, or take upon yourself to prove it wrong.

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

#404

Post by thescribe »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #355
ubertaco wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you want to express a political view at work then the people to whom you are expressing it have a right to dislike you for it. Do those people have a right to take action to negatively impact your career/livelihood/ability-to-provide-for-your-family because of your political views?

If your political views negatively impact their career/livelihood/ability-to-provide-for-your-family then it would be a violation of the golden rule if they couldn't.

I feel like this is a strange position, because every single political issue does this to someone. Raise my property tax for schools? Time to blacklist you, I needed that money for elder care.

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

#405

Post by thescribe »

akilism wrote: post #69
jnet wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I see posts in my facebook feed that say unfriend me if you believe x, I always unfriend them even if I don't believe x. If you are not tolerant of different points of view I really don't want to be your friend.

There are some viewpoints that should not be tolerated though.

I'm glad you agree with my super conservative grandmother.

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

#406

Post by thescribe »

empath75 wrote: post #90
tboyd47 wrote: post #14

My question is, why do all of a person's co-workers need to know their political affiliation? You can choose what aspects of yourself you want to reveal and conceal from people at work. For example, I don't reveal my religious beliefs to people at work unless someone asks me, which rarely happens. Politics is much the same. > He showed coworkers emails he exchanged with Ivanka Trump after he mailed her photos he took…

"Don't talk about politics at work" has always been sound advice.

At the many companies I've worked at there has always been one side that doesn't think this applies to them.

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

#407

Post by thescribe »

thedz wrote: post #57

IMO, part of the problem is that some "conservative" viewpoints nowadays are directly attacking or undermining how your coworkers might live. And in many cases, so much so that their views go from "well, that sucks but I can still live my life" to "if your views were enacted, my way of life would be destroyed".

So taking away a conservative's guns or forcing them to pay into a social safety net are equally immoral?

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

#408

Post by CalChris »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #385
CalChris wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At what point do you judge a person because your litany of examples isn't making any sense. All I'm seeing here is an attempt at equivocation.

I don't? I judge actions, in context, but I avoid doing even that if I don't know a lot about the actions and the context.

> maybe not with the much much part, because to me it seems to be a similar kind of stupidity;

Yes, you do. This is equivocation.

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

#409

Post by peoplewindow »

vorotato wrote: post #398
peoplewindow wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a paradox, it's just doublethink. The key is to realise that the "Antifa" agenda has nothing to do with tolerance, regardless of what they claim.

That's not actually an argument? Also the Paradox of Tolerance is a paradox and is a component of decision theory, and is a pretty well understood mathematical construct. So you can't argue that the Paradox of Tolerance isn't a thing you can only argue that the Nazis and KKK aren't intolerant. Most people would disagree with that...

The "Paradox" you are citing was posed by a philosopher, not a mathematician. Philosophy is not mathematics, no matter how much they might like the association.

This isn't as complicated or confounding as you seem to think. The "fascists" that Antifa think they're fighting aren't attempting to overthrow the government or build armies of SS-style street thugs. They are usually just protesting, or sometimes trying to give a speech at a university.

Speech should be countered with more speech. Violence, with violence in the proportion needed to stop it.

Antifa's agenda is to use violence to suppress speech. Like a lot of self-righteous activity it is rooted in hypocrisy. Their goal is to stop people from disagreeing with their political agenda by labelling any such disagreement as "Nazi" or "fascist" and then claiming their violence is justified as otherwise they'd be "tolerating intolerance". It is doublethink.

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

#410

Post by meric »

vorotato wrote: post #398
peoplewindow wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a paradox, it's just doublethink. The key is to realise that the "Antifa" agenda has nothing to do with tolerance, regardless of what they claim.

That's not actually an argument? Also the Paradox of Tolerance is a paradox and is a component of decision theory, and is a pretty well understood mathematical construct. So you can't argue that the Paradox of Tolerance isn't a thing you can only argue that the Nazis and KKK aren't intolerant. Most people would disagree with that...

The paradox of tolerance is false - the intolerant can change their minds - it's their intolerant ideas that must be attacked, not the person whose minds hold those ideas. The persons always deserve to be treated with as if they are fellow human beings, because they are.

Those ones who would not tolerate those with intolerant ideas, have intolerant ideas too, and they must be convinced their ideas are wrong.

Post reply on HN