Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even the NLRB (pretty much the most employee-friendly place you can find, if you look through rulings) found they didn't.
The rulings stated it was legal for Google to do what they did. And I totally agree that it was legal - my gripe is with the difference in how society at large reacted to it. I've quoted a few relevant sections from the rulings In the summary: "we conclude that the memorandum included both protected and unprotected statements and that the Employer discharged [Damore] solely for [Damore's] unprotected statements. Ther…
Google employees are staging a sit-in to protest reported retaliation
71–80 of 148 posts
Re: Google employees are staging a sit-in to protest reported retaliation
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fascism tends to have these attributes: * dictatorial power * totalitarian one party state * embrace of political violence as a means to silence opposition * strong opposition to Marxism, liberalism, conservatism * radical nationalism * nationalist economic policy through protectionist schemes See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Definitions What about a group of employees collectively organizing and protesting…
It is possibly some groundwork being laid for the argument that the term 'fascism' has been overused so much by 'the left' that it no longer means anything. Should other lines of argument fail, this one can be mobilized as a distraction, giving time to regroup.
eg for the Nazis, "Fascist" still meant the Italian party despite their own party having quite a large overlap in philosophy. Every political movement seems to care more about internal differences far more than outsiders do (see People's Front of Judea).
It was always hard to pin down and never really ever had a strict definition - just an incomplete collection of possible tendencies (see the Wikipedia article above).
But yeah, usage has always been loose/overused.
Re: Google employees are staging a sit-in to protest reported retaliation
#73Someone posted preliminary sit-in attendance numbers. Attendance ranges from 50-150 per office in the larger offices. Anecdotally, I've seen very little discussion and energy this time compared to the walkout. Back then, one couldn't walk 20 feet without hitting some kind of exhortation to join the walkout. This time, more people might find out about this sit-in through this HN story than through internal channels. T…
Re: Google employees are staging a sit-in to protest reported retaliation
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you elaborate on this?
Here's a WaPo article from the controversial woman Google appointed to the board, Kay Cole James. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-wanted-to-help-goo... I may not agree with her politically, but its important to have different viewpoints in discourse as long as they're rooted in principles. I think its shameful that the AI Ethics Council was disbanded, if employees took issue with her it would have been nice…
Re: Google employees are staging a sit-in to protest reported retaliation
#75Google employees protesting the makeup of the AI Ethics council appeared like the closest thing to fascism in the USA that I have ever witnessed. I hope some people see the need for diversity of viewpoint and start to be more accepting of their fellow countrymen, while agreeing on what to condemn.
Fascism tends to have these attributes: * dictatorial power * totalitarian one party state * embrace of political violence as a means to silence opposition * strong opposition to Marxism, liberalism, conservatism * radical nationalism * nationalist economic policy through protectionist schemes See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Definitions What about a group of employees collectively organizing and protesting…
* dictatorial power
* totalitarian one party state
* embrace of political violence as a means to silence opposition
* strong opposition to Marxism, liberalism, conservatism
* radical nationalism
* nationalist economic policy through protectionist schemes
Funny, but if you just erase the word "Marxism" then you also have something which resembles the Soviet Union under Stalin. It also fits a lot of historical communist regimes, though the nationalism is disguised or submerged as "worker solidarity." However in times of war or crisis, they generally bang the nationalist drum as hard as anyone else. A "nationalist economic policy through protectionist schemes" is just meddling against markets and central planning by another name.National Socialism and Fascism are identified as "right," but this is primarily through the application of nationalism, conquest, and opposition to communism. Look under those fig leafs, and you find something very different.
National Socialism and Fascists consistently implemented socialist policies. Under National Socialism, control by the state was so complete, the private ownership meant nothing. Property owners were called Betriebsfurhrer -- basically shop managers enacting state policy. What was made, who it was sold to, how much was charged, and how much the workers were paid were largely determined by the government. National Socialism was strongly against liberal democracy. (Liberalism in the 19th century Classical Liberal sense, which in 2019 is labeled "conservatism" in the US.) They were also openly against free markets, multi-party democratic government, freedom of speech, and other individual human rights. Mussolini started out as a Socialist, and at one point, he literally styled himself, "The Lenin of Italy." Also, many of the essentially socialist policies of National Socialist Germany in the 1930's garnered praise from American progressives.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNJzqqh-jRw
What about a group of employees collectively organizing and protesting non-violently against an internal board at a privatized company is exactly fascist?
The collectivism is a shared attribute of Fascism. Also, as observed in a different comment, if they are suppressing dissent and speech in their own ranks and using pressure tactics to keep their own ranks in line, then this is another shared attribute.
Re: Google employees are staging a sit-in to protest reported retaliation
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meredith Whittaker and company could not find peace in their hearts with the appointment of (the president of the long standing, prominent conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation) Kay Cole James. So they made a big problem about it, and here we are. Tolerance, for my views but not yours.
Toleration of intolerance is self-defeating, but you probably knew that.
The "paradox of tolerance" in 2019 is used as a word game for one group to justify their intolerance of another group they do not like.
Re: Google employees are staging a sit-in to protest reported retaliation
#77I wish there was more negative backlash when Google retaliated against James Damore The privilege to speak up against the status quo is important. Especially when you have less power, and even if your opinion is unsavory to some
It wasn't retaliation, a good number of Googlers didn't want to be working with someone who believes women and minorities were just dumb diversity hires.
It's not at all what Damore's memo said.
The real game is suppressing engineer salary in a decade long bull market to limit competition. James got too close to this truth and was punished for it, and the people who actually know the game toxified him by surrounding him with bad social stigma so that no one else thought to question.
Re: Google employees are staging a sit-in to protest reported retaliation
#78How does a sit in work?
Re: Google employees are staging a sit-in to protest reported retaliation
#79Someone posted preliminary sit-in attendance numbers. Attendance ranges from 50-150 per office in the larger offices. Anecdotally, I've seen very little discussion and energy this time compared to the walkout. Back then, one couldn't walk 20 feet without hitting some kind of exhortation to join the walkout. This time, more people might find out about this sit-in through this HN story than through internal channels. T…
Re: Google employees are staging a sit-in to protest reported retaliation
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
The rulings stated it was legal for Google to do what they did. And I totally agree that it was legal - my gripe is with the difference in how society at large reacted to it. I've quoted a few relevant sections from the rulings In the summary: "we conclude that the memorandum included both protected and unprotected statements and that the Employer discharged [Damore] solely for [Damore's] unprotected statements. Ther…
Where does it sound like they're saying Google retaliated?
We could have a big discussion about the definition of the word retaliation, and under a lot of very reasonable definitions it's fine to me if we don't call it "retaliation"
The point is, Google is an organization that acts and reacts within a hugely complex system. I wish it was more acceptable for their employees to critique them, even if these critiques are largely received as taboo