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

Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

money.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 138 posts

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#101

Post by simonsarris »

quotemstr wrote: post #100
simonsarris wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or last night's football game, which just got political? What are colleagues allowed to talk about, exactly? If we "just don't talk about politics" the end result will be everyone talking and engaging less on any mildly controversial topic (which now includes "the game last night"), and since this cannot be avoided, they will simply talk and engage less altogether. I don't think that's acceptable, so I don't think "k…

Ideally, we'd be able to talk about any topic. But right now, the country is divided into two equal halves, each of which thinks the other is the ultimate evil, the enemy beyond reason, the Other which must be excised from the tribe for the safety of all. Given this political climate, which isn't changing soon, and given the business need to work together toward common goals, then no, we can't let politics into the w…

I agree with your diagnosis but not with your cure.

We should not fear politics and people discussing politics. We should be fearing those extreme ideologues.

Don't ostracize political discussion. Ostracize acting like an extreme ideologue.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#102

Post by gonehome »

CalChris wrote: post #98
RightMillennial wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're saying that you would reject otherwise qualified candidates based on their religion (a protected class in the U.S.), which is illegal?

It’s not illegal for me to reject non-Flying Spaghetti Monsterarians on the basis of their religion. It is unconstitutional for the govmint to do so.

Actually if you’re hiring - religion is a protected class and it is illegal for you to discriminate based on it.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#103

Post by CalChris »

gonehome wrote: post #102
CalChris wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not illegal for me to reject non-Flying Spaghetti Monsterarians on the basis of their religion. It is unconstitutional for the govmint to do so.

Actually if you’re hiring - religion is a protected class and it is illegal for you to discriminate based on it.

I was under the misapprehension that candidate meant political candidate and not job candidate. My mistake.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#104

Post by notconservative »

hasbroslasher wrote: post #78
notconservative wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did that recently, moved from the Bay Area to a red state. But, what about the concept of engaging with and challenging people who have different beliefs? People don't really change their minds when you call them a racist, fire them, etc. When I am talking to a liberal who I know wont try to cause problems for me (like getting me fired), I will ask lots of questions. Why do you believe X? What facts support that op…

I'm not saying I can't/won't/don't do that. I love discussing politics with my family, who are very conservative, and it's always nice and respectful. I just don't want to live in their society. Generally, they don't want to live in mine either. Not every liberal around me believes exactly the same thing. We'll quarrel about whether Black Lives Matter is doing good or whether UBI is actually an evil capitalist plot o…

It's nice that you have some friends that you can discuss opposing views with. I also cherish some of my liberal friends who I can have a genuine discussion with.

I've also had some bad experiences with family members who support Trump and are super emotional, vocal, and resistant to any discussion about him either on the policy- or simple behavior-level.

IMO there is a hidden wedge in politics between people who are willing to engage with their opinions and others who will take your beliefs in the worst possible context. It's not necessarily a right-left thing, or even a centrist/extremist thing either. I've had some of the most enlightening discussions about politics with people that are super extreme in their progressivism, communism, or conservatism, because they are so knowledgable about political philosophy or the data supporting their beliefs.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#105

Post by notconservative »

justin66 wrote: post #82
notconservative wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did that recently, moved from the Bay Area to a red state. But, what about the concept of engaging with and challenging people who have different beliefs? People don't really change their minds when you call them a racist, fire them, etc. When I am talking to a liberal who I know wont try to cause problems for me (like getting me fired), I will ask lots of questions. Why do you believe X? What facts support that op…

> But, what about the concept of engaging with and challenging people who have different beliefs? What about not doing it at work, since that is not what anybody is there for?

That'd be fine with me if it was enforced equally. I haven't worked anywhere that attempted to do that, so not sure if it'd work or not. But, I'm skeptical.

I think what may happen is that it'd go underground. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not. It may be a kind of secret reason to cause strife between employees.

It would have to be supported as a broader part of the company culture. No discussing things that aren't relevant to work. A "We're here to work and that's it." kind of policy.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#106

Post by erik_seaberg »

alexryan wrote: post #92

Sorry, but if you don't have the courage to speak your truth, then you deserve the chains of slavery that you choose to wear and the dearth of self-respect that comes with it.

> When you find something you can't say, what do you do with it? My advice is, don't say it. Or at least, pick your battles.

- http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#107

Post by marcelluspye »

lambdaphagy wrote: post #87
UncleSlacky wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This, but unironically.

Among the very smartest people I know, I count both Trump supporters and anyone-but-Trump supporters. If you don't know any smart people who disagree with you, consider the possibility that you may be living in a kind of intellectual Mauritius.

>Among the very smartest people I know, I count both Trump supporters and anyone-but-Trump supporters.

Not the guy you were replying to, but I can't say the same. I know plenty of smart conservatives, and plenty of smart republicans, (some of whom may have voted for Trump), but of the very few Trump supporters I know, I would definitely not say they're among the smartest I know.

An even fewer number of times have I talked to someone with a MAGA hat, and every single one of those times the hat's owner has said something blatantly ignorant, racist or sexist.

Are there smart trump supporters? I'm sure there are some. Do I feel like I'm losing anything by not associating with them? No, not really.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#108

Post by lambdaphagy »

marcelluspye wrote: post #107
lambdaphagy wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Among the very smartest people I know, I count both Trump supporters and anyone-but-Trump supporters. If you don't know any smart people who disagree with you, consider the possibility that you may be living in a kind of intellectual Mauritius.

>Among the very smartest people I know, I count both Trump supporters and anyone-but-Trump supporters. Not the guy you were replying to, but I can't say the same. I know plenty of smart conservatives, and plenty of smart republicans, (some of whom may have voted for Trump), but of the very few Trump supporters I know, I would definitely not say they're among the smartest I know. An even fewer number of times have I t…

I'm not talking about association, I'm talking about engagement. You don't have to like someone to consider that their views are worth grappling with.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#109

Post by RickJWag »

marcelluspye wrote: post #107
lambdaphagy wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Among the very smartest people I know, I count both Trump supporters and anyone-but-Trump supporters. If you don't know any smart people who disagree with you, consider the possibility that you may be living in a kind of intellectual Mauritius.

>Among the very smartest people I know, I count both Trump supporters and anyone-but-Trump supporters. Not the guy you were replying to, but I can't say the same. I know plenty of smart conservatives, and plenty of smart republicans, (some of whom may have voted for Trump), but of the very few Trump supporters I know, I would definitely not say they're among the smartest I know. An even fewer number of times have I t…

I didn't vote for Trump, but I now believe he was the best candidate.

Hillary's cheat against Bernie and her shaming of Bill's victims is the primary reason I find Trump the best choice.

So you'd have to call me a Trump supporter. I think if you find the above arguments stupid, we'd have a disagreement.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#110

Post by RickJWag »

rrauenza wrote: post #47
pklausler wrote: post #23

One of the problems that we face in the US today is that our two political parties, which once divided the electorate across fault lines of policy or values, now appear to have reshuffled the electorate across epistemologies. I sincerely believe that one party now provides a happier home for those who prefer empirical science.

It depends on the issue (edit: and how it fits with their world view). The left can also be irrational when it comes to science on some issues as well: http://www.realclearscience.com/journal_club/2014/10/20/are_... Ending quote: >The bottom line is that the CDC data makes it very difficult to argue that conservatives and liberals share equal blame in the anti-vaccine war. Anti-vaxxers are clearly more associated wit…

You forgot the absolute truth that a 36 week old baby is in fact a baby.

To pretend otherwise (to justify murdering it) is just plain denial.

Post reply on HN