After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract

Post by pmiller2 » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 11:24 PM UTC

herbstein wrote: post #339

jrochkind1 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So not to go all Godwin, but take an extreme example... Do you think a company in 1930s Germany should have ethically refused to provide software that was used in concentration camps? [In fact, there was a bit of "IT" then, used for such, but it was provided by IBM. But to make the analogy closer, let's imagine a hypothetically Germany company]. ("Companies" don't do anything by themselves, so I guess the question is…

I definitely think this line of reasoning pays off well, and is isn't really an " extreme example". The point is to establish the "sometimes it's the right thing to do", to unequivocally prove that the discussion should be re-framed. I've posited the same argument around violence. Most people, in my experience, wouldn't fault a Jew for violently resisting the Nazis. In fact, many resistance groups are held in very hi…

Post by hvis » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 11:28 PM UTC

Post by munificent » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 11:28 PM UTC

rattray wrote: post #103

jobeirne wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a private entity, especially for essentially political reasons, is lunacy. Um, think you've got this backwards. Private entities shouldn't have to take on anyone they don't want as customers (for whatever reason - do you have to justify who you do or don't want in your livingroom?), but publicly-funded institutions shouldn't be able to deny service o…

That is true – businesses are legally allowed to refuse service to anyone (apart from protected classes like race or political affiliation, but that probably does not apply here). It's an important right, and probably many businesses would be more profitable and happy if they exercised that right more often. It's still politically dangerous, and would earn a company a lot of enemies and mistrust (as well as some alli…

Post by austincheney » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 11:31 PM UTC

tehwebguy wrote: post #667

austincheney wrote: post #661

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (for whatever reason - do you have to justify who you do or don't want in your livingroom?) In most casts that results in discriminatory civil suits. Imagine a restaurant, who has even greater leverage to test the for whatever reason mentality, asking a black family to leave without stating a reason. In most places in the US restaurants have the legal right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

OP should have said "for whatever lawful reason" Race is a protected class, occupation is not.

Post by sudosysgen » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 11:37 PM UTC

wolco wrote: post #249

tresfaim wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't you see this helping? Can you not see the rally that is happening in the corporate world in favor of the BLM movement? Even if corporations are posturing this stance with no real action at the moment, if bigger entities make real actions like this, it will catch on, and then it will trickle down to smaller businesses, and it will seep into lobbying circles. This has leaderships around the world forced to ma…

Your movement hit at a bad time. The corporate world has to grip with a few critical issues around staying in business, shifting to remote and it will increasely feel a pressure to move manifacturing onshore. I would focua on what changes you can make with police forces before the second covid wave hits and pushes your issue to remember when status.