Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#191

Post by xhkkffbf » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 4:58 PM UTC

arcticbull wrote: post #52

refurb wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. If I'm working on a team that is rolling out a new Google drive feature, I really don't need to hear you talk about why drinking straws are a phallic symbol and used by the patriarchy to keep woman down. We have work to do.

I'm sure the oppressed party in your example feels the polar opposite and don't want to hear your whining about how feminism doesn't matter in modern society because it's good enough as is. And I think that's the point :)

They can debate this on their own time. Unless you're on the straw team, this doesn't matter.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#192

Post by LifeLiverTransp » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 4:59 PM UTC

tdb7893 wrote: post #115

SkyBelow wrote: post #64

>I think they just overestimated the ability of their employees to respect each other when they hold differing world views. I think this can be quite difficult to do just because of the political views involved. For example, how should a gay man respect a colleague who honestly thinks that homosexuality should be punished with death. In such a case, I would say that even asking the first individual to tolerate, much…

I've seen people at work defend trans hate as a "conservative value". It's fine if people have different opinions on taxes but to reject people's identity like that, especially one held by some of their colleagues, should cross a line and they shouldn't be able to hide behind "conservative values".

Its traditional how a rule of law was created in most older societys. Ostracice a caste of sexual deviants and give them social power at the same time.

Things didnt change, the church is just called diffrent, the dogma of social contracts and the heresy to break them is still the same.

Explain to me the social construct difference between a catholic procession and a gay pride parade.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#193

Post by quotemstr » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 4:59 PM UTC

SkyBelow wrote: post #136

Koshkin wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everything is political. Math is not political.

Math is probably one of the if not the least political thing out there, but there are still politics involved. For starters, all mathematicians need funding and choosing who to fund is partially political. Deciding awards is partially political. Even the importance of taking or rejecting some axioms and if certain fields still have value for further research is political. There are even different axioms one can use t…

You can find a way to relate politics to any endeavor, but politics is central to things like tax policy in a way that it's not central to, say, N-dimensional manifolds. Equating the two kinds of relationship is a fundamentally dishonest intellectual tactic used by people who want to inject political activism into every human endeavor. People need to stop doing that.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#194

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 4:59 PM UTC

nailer wrote: post #141

gwbas1c wrote: post #92

Ever since the infamous "diversity memo," (which I disagree with,) I've gotten the impression that political discussions at Google turned toxic. A well run company includes people with diverse political views points. A workplace that's hostile to anyone who leans right or leans left ultimately hurts diversity.

Most of the memo was citations of studies of sex differences. People can either agree with the studies or disagree with the research used (it's totally cool with me if you do disagree with the research), but the idea that someone should be punished for talking about research at a company that extols "data driven decision making" as one of it's principles baffles me.

[deleted]

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#195

Post by ocdtrekkie » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 4:59 PM UTC

gwbas1c wrote: post #92

Ever since the infamous "diversity memo," (which I disagree with,) I've gotten the impression that political discussions at Google turned toxic. A well run company includes people with diverse political views points. A workplace that's hostile to anyone who leans right or leans left ultimately hurts diversity.

My impression has not been that the memo is when political discussions turned toxic, but merely the first time it very publicly breached the sacred wall of non-disclosure with the outside world. Prior to that, most everyone seemed content to be upset with each other internally.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#196

Post by InTheArena » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 4:59 PM UTC

SkyBelow wrote: post #64

>I think they just overestimated the ability of their employees to respect each other when they hold differing world views. I think this can be quite difficult to do just because of the political views involved. For example, how should a gay man respect a colleague who honestly thinks that homosexuality should be punished with death. In such a case, I would say that even asking the first individual to tolerate, much…

No one at google was calling for the death of their homosexual coworkers.

This is the exact kind of polarization that googles own internal media has amplified which has led to a radical left that refuses any compromises with liberals and moderates and for conservatives who were marginalized becoming increasingly radicalized as a response.

Putting the entire argument into the most extreme case is just another reflection of take no prisoners arguments that have ranged on both sides of the ideological debate.

This is exactly why attacks on tolerance cannot have special exceptions. It becomes too easy to define the most extreme cases as being representative of the mainstream. Recent research has shown that both left and right constantly miss characterize the other. Unfortunately with the left that mischaracterization becomes more prevalent the more “educated” one becomes.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#197

Post by dragontamer » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 5:00 PM UTC

Kalium wrote: post #135

SkyBelow wrote: post #64

>I think they just overestimated the ability of their employees to respect each other when they hold differing world views. I think this can be quite difficult to do just because of the political views involved. For example, how should a gay man respect a colleague who honestly thinks that homosexuality should be punished with death. In such a case, I would say that even asking the first individual to tolerate, much…

Tolerance isn't considered a virtue because it's easy. Tolerance is a virtue because it's difficult . It requires us to put up with people who may adhere to worldviews we find utterly alien or hold views we find abhorrent. It's easy to come up with an example and find yourself thinking "It's unreasonable to tolerate that!". Instead, consider asking yourself why people a century ago might tolerate views you think of a…

Tolerance for tolerance's sake isn't useful though. The hypothetical Nazi / Hitler example shows up: if Hitler existed today, are we supposed to tolerate his views?

Tolerance breaks down because morality kicks in: a good moral person tries to wipe out evil when they see evil. The problem is that we can't agree on what is, and isn't evil.

Which is a problem when people increasingly believe the "other side" to be evil. (Abortion is murder vs Anti-choice are womanizers). Both sides want to wipe each other out, not necessarily kill them, but they want to politically negate the opponent's argument.

In many cases, ideas, ideals, and philosophy are incompatible. That's just how the world works.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#198

Post by anoncake » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 5:00 PM UTC

Analemma_ wrote: post #53

I think this was inevitable in the long run. From the very beginning, Google has tried to have the atmosphere of a college campus rather than a normal workplace, probably (at least in the early days before every tech company started doing this) to help them stand out among job applicants as an alternative to stuffier companies. The thing is though, professional work environments (where there are typically norms aroun…

> The thing is though, professional work environments (where there are typically norms around never discussing politics) are the way they are for a reason.

The reason is the same as for not talking about salary at work: To prevent workers from developing class consciousness.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#199

Post by Nevermindmine » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 5:00 PM UTC

arcticbull wrote: post #69

root_axis wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their job is to create a forum for others to debate, and to try and maintain neutrality What? Says who?

Others as in not their employees. Google indexes all the worlds information, who says their goal is to impose their opinion on it? Isn't neutrality in indexing the assumption?

Why would you assume that?

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#200

Post by chipotle_coyote » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 5:00 PM UTC

azffz wrote: post #128

tdb7893 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen people at work defend trans hate as a "conservative value". It's fine if people have different opinions on taxes but to reject people's identity like that, especially one held by some of their colleagues, should cross a line and they shouldn't be able to hide behind "conservative values".

That's the point, you should be able to hold that opinion, but you should not publicly state it openly at work in the first place.

The example given by the person you're replying to seems, to be understated about it, to be in a bit more complicated of an area than "just don't talk about it and things will be fine." If Bob and Alice have significant disagreements about health care policy and taxation, they can probably still get along by just not talking about it. If Bob believes Alice should be put to death because she's a transwoman, that could, you know, lead to a bit of workplace tension even if they don't have casual conversations at the La Croix cooler over how he thinks she should be stoned and she thinks she shouldn't.