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

Some Facebook Employees Unite to Challenge Its ‘Intolerant’ Liberal Culture

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 728 posts

Re: Some Facebook Employees Unite to Challenge Its ‘Intolerant’ Liberal Culture

#311

Post by eli_gottlieb »

mwfunk wrote: post #152
taneq wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up with the understanding that just because someone thought differently to me didn't mean they were wrong, and that it's OK for people to agree to disagree on some things while still remaining friends. This view has definitely gone out of vogue in the past 10 years.

Nothing has changed with regard to reasonable people reasonably disagreeing over reasonable differences. The Overton Window has changed for sure, but that's what it does. I struggle to think of any perspective that has moved out of the Overton Window over the past 10 years that I regret losing. If anything the Overton Window has moved backwards in recent years to better accommodate the Alex Joneses of the world, but…

>The Overton Window has changed for sure, but that's what it does. I struggle to think of any perspective that has moved out of the Overton Window over the past 10 years that I regret losing.

Honestly, I want the Overton Window to be consistent with what people actually do in real life. I've begun to grow uncomfortable with a political environment in which we all need to hash-tag #AbolishICE, when we all know that the actual abolition of the American border is outside the Overton Window for the solid reasons that nobody has come up with a plan to do it, including the people leading the hash-tag campaigns.

If we are to have an Overton Window, I want it to be the same one for rhetoric, actions, and policies. I don't want this world we're getting where we all mouth extremist rhetoric and then pass mild reformist touch-ups to the status quo.

Re: Some Facebook Employees Unite to Challenge Its ‘Intolerant’ Liberal Culture

#312

Post by majos »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #283
xexers wrote: post #269

[Deleted]

They have complained and have even asked for reparations.

They have also been granted reparations of about $160 million.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Liberties_Act_of_1988

Re: Some Facebook Employees Unite to Challenge Its ‘Intolerant’ Liberal Culture

#313

Post by CharlesW »

jeffdavis wrote: post #197

I had never heard of Alex Jones before. It doesn't particularly bother me if a couple companies kick him off their platform. But it was really disturbing that it was a coordinated move by all the major social platforms at once. Wow. It's shocking that they would cooperate with eachother on those decisions. Secondarily, it undermines the idea that they can leave all kinds of bad stuff on their network (libel, etc.) an…

> But it was really disturbing that it was a coordinated move by all the major social platforms at once.

That's his claim, but the reality is that (1) he violated hate speech policies on several platforms at around the same time, and (2) he's happily tweeting his usual garbage on Twitter as I type this.

Re: Some Facebook Employees Unite to Challenge Its ‘Intolerant’ Liberal Culture

#314

Post by rhexs »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #283
xexers wrote: post #269

[Deleted]

They have complained and have even asked for reparations.

The surviving Japanese Americans actually received reparations for the internment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Liberties_Act_of_1988

Re: Some Facebook Employees Unite to Challenge Its ‘Intolerant’ Liberal Culture

#315

Post by woodruffw »

mc32 wrote: post #291
woodruffw wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communism, expressed as the kind that killed all those people, is objectionable. I object to it, and it seems like a broad segment of the population agrees. However, that just isn't the same as what I'm describing. There is nothing analytical about communism that poses an existential threat to me. Neo-Nazism, on other other hand, is a priori incompatible with my existence.

I do see this difference. However, in practice communism and faschism are pretty much two sides of the same coin. One has specific victims (though like communism, none stated, but there is always the out-group, I mean, you see Black African nazi sympathizers in Africa) communism also has an out-group: whether it be the owner-class or people who get in the way of their ideology.

Sure, there's plenty of violence in the world. I am opposed to most forms of it.

But no, there is no equivocation here. One of these things (Neo-Nazism) is fundamentally incompatible, even just on the linguistic level, with my existence. The other (Communism) is undesirable and even reprehensible, but doesn't threaten the mode of discourse itself.

Put another way: proposing tolerance towards analytically intolerant ideas amounts to an "disagreement" between a linguistic claim and a claim about the language itself. I wrote about the danger of viewing these as normal "disagreements" about a week ago[1].

[1]: https://blog.yossarian.net/2018/08/20/Disagreement-Language-...

Re: Some Facebook Employees Unite to Challenge Its ‘Intolerant’ Liberal Culture

#316

Post by tptacek »

RandomOpinion wrote: post #281
tptacek wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who says it has to be an according-to-Hoyle union? The NLRA covers all concerted organized action. Start a professional association. The doctors and lawyers have them. We don't get one? Why?

There's the ACM and IEEE already though?

The ACM is an academic association. The IEEE should be more important professionally than it is; one problem with the IEEE is that you have to have a related bachelors degree to join.

Developers should start a new organization that represents the interests of employees of the technology industry.

Re: Some Facebook Employees Unite to Challenge Its ‘Intolerant’ Liberal Culture

#317

Post by ThomPete »

methodover wrote: post #267
_8j50 wrote: post #84

Worked across very liberal and very conservative places in tech. Neither is pleasant. In my opinion, the American self-image and self-worth largely characterized by subscription to a political ideology is the problem. What bothers me is not dress codes,free meals,open offices,etc... But the very idea that a company would display or promote politics in the work place. Why are companies promoting "pride",donating to tr…

You might not realize this, but you come off a little bit anti-gay in your post. > Why are companies promoting "pride"? First of all, you don't need to put pride in safety quotes. Second of all, gay rights are human rights. Companies promote them because it's the right thing to do, and because they want all the good things that come along with doing the right thing. I don't think it's all that complicated. Edit: If y…

The right thing to do is not letting any one special cause dominate.

My guess is that you arent tolerant of everyone either.

Gays are humans they have human rights not gay rights its this idea thats gays are somehow more worthy of our support than say a conservative at a liberal workplace thats the crux of the problem. I dont care what people are, who they sleep with, what they believe, as long as i am not asked to offer them special considertations i wouldnt extend to others.

Thats the right thing to do, not forcing conpanies to take up social caused for a small privileged group of vocal people.

Re: Some Facebook Employees Unite to Challenge Its ‘Intolerant’ Liberal Culture

#318

Post by pvg »

RandomOpinion wrote: post #281
tptacek wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who says it has to be an according-to-Hoyle union? The NLRA covers all concerted organized action. Start a professional association. The doctors and lawyers have them. We don't get one? Why?

There's the ACM and IEEE already though?

Those things mostly exist to collect membership fees and run conferences.

Re: Some Facebook Employees Unite to Challenge Its ‘Intolerant’ Liberal Culture

#319

Post by CharlesW »

_8j50 wrote: post #118
itronitron wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what was unpleasant about the very liberal workplace?

Same as conservative. Someone telling me what is ok and not ok to believe. I did not show up to work to get a brain-wash. I joined a company,not a cult.

> Someone telling me what is ok and not ok to believe.

Like what?

Re: Some Facebook Employees Unite to Challenge Its ‘Intolerant’ Liberal Culture

#320

Post by manfredo »

charlesism wrote: post #279
manfredo wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but saying you'd fire the majority of the US population in the name of tolerance is absolutely contradictory. The notion that a blanket firing of 45% of the adult population is an act of tolerance is ridiculous. Sure I do think there are some views that should not be tolerated and employees who advocate them should be removed - none of the four listed there come close to it, though.

> The notion that a blanket firing of > 45% of the adult population is an act > of tolerance is ridiculous. Nope. It's perfectly moral, logical, and whether it's 45%, or 1%, or 99% makes no difference. The examples from history are too numerous to mention. You have to decide what your values are and stand by them.

I'm not talking about morality or ethics, I'm talking about tolerance. Only tolerating the things you think are morally right isn't tolerance - quite the opposite. Tolerance entails tolerating things even when you don't find them morally right. For instance, I think a closed border is morally bad - it's still an act of intolerance if I were to fire someone for supporting enforcement of immigration laws.

This warped definition of tolerance particularly worried me. The growing notion that tolerance means snuffing out views one disapproves of, rather than tolerating them is the root of much of the growing political division in my opinion. And not to mention, there's a big risk that this will hurt liberals in the long run. It's easy to forget that this line of thinking also empowers conservatives to snuff out views they don't like - and look at who's in control of the White House, Congress, and (likely soon to be) the Supreme Court.

Post reply on HN