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

Resignation Letter

bariweiss.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 716 posts

Re: Resignation Letter

#361

Post by throwaway894345 »

chasing wrote: post #277
throwaway894345 wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fourth, when I hear people complain about "going against the progressive party line" or whatever, I generally hear people wanting to be some flavor of racist, sexist, transphobic, or just asshole-ish without consequence. I hear this all the time, but it seems so disingenuous. There are so many national examples that no reasonable person could consider to be any of the above: * A hispanic man was fired for accidenta…

Did any of them sign that Harper's Letter? And did I say "frothing racists?" Also, yeah, out of the crooked timber of humanity no straight thing was ever made. People get things wrong sometimes. It sucks and we should use our freedom of speech to help correct those errors, not argue that freedom of speech should be shut down.

> Also, yeah, out of the crooked timber of humanity no straight thing was ever made. People get things wrong sometimes. It sucks and we should use our freedom of speech to help correct those errors, not argue that freedom of speech should be shut down.

There's a difference in my opinion between harassment and free speech. Notably, if you're trying to punish, threaten, or coerce someone, you fall outside of the bounds of "criticism". This may not be the legal definition, but I can't see any other definition that would be consistent with free speech ideals.

Further, because it's perhaps too difficult to legally litigate this kind of harassment, we could also approach the problem by making it more difficult for employers to terminate employees, thereby neutering the mobs (they can "speak" all they want but they can't persecute).

Re: Resignation Letter

#362

Post by koheripbal »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #88
seibelj wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the latest argument from people who claim cancel culture doesn't exist. "How are you being silenced when everyone will read it from your high perch?" High-level writers need to push back against illiberal and anti-free speech proponents to give cover for the lower ranks. If even the top tier writers can't speak their mind, does the lowly intern or new hire stand a chance?

The problem with this rebuttal is that it assumes that the high–level writers and editors are not themselves the illiberal and anti–speech proponents, gatekeeping what perspectives are allowed to be represented in the first place. For example: Harper's Magazine, which published the recent open letter on cancel culture that Bari Weiss signed, doesn't pay its interns [1], ensuring that only those who can afford to work…

wow... you are literally embodying the cancel culture by claiming that their opinion is irrelevant because of some HR pay practice you discovered that is totally orthogonal to the conversation?

Should we cancel your opinion because of some seemingly inconsistent opinion you had in your comment history?

This is exactly the practice of arguing the arguer, rather than the argument, and it's a bad faith tactic.

Re: Resignation Letter

#363

Post by maverick2007 »

maxwin wrote: post #345
mikece wrote: post #3

"Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at [the New York Times]: that truth isn't a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else." This is a very key point, and what are the consequences of "informing everyone of a truth" that doesn't accurately reflect -- of even contradicts! -- reality? Harm to the reput…

“Especially at the New York Times” ??? Seriously? How about Fox News. NYT May have some issues but they are still 1000X more accurate and honest than conservative media like Fox News. Media like Fox News is destroying America. That’s the real danger.

Fox News is absolutely bad for the country but can't we condemn it when we see similar tactics on both sides of the aisle? Condemning NYT for its wrongs doesn't make Fox any less bad.

Re: Resignation Letter

#364

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

amscanne wrote: post #279
enraged_camel wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Can't anyone there see past the current insanity and think? "To be inclusive, we have to get rid of her"? Don't they even hear the words coming out of their own mouths? This confuses a lot of people, but the explanation is simple: it is the Paradox of Tolerance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance Namely, not tolerating someone, who themselves espouse intolerant views and give voice to intolerant ex…

Unfortunately, there does seem to be a massive lack of consistency on which intolerance to tolerate. Since we’re talking about Bari Weiss, Israel serves as a good example. While the left is typically critical of Israel and their “racist”, “apartheid” state, they generally have very little to say about their overtly anti-Semitic neighbor states. I’m sure there’s lots of criticism to go round here, but whoever is talki…

Israel's a tricky case, to be honest.

It's worth noting that the more virulent people on both sides I've encountered tend to be either citizens or residents of America, which I find odd.

I do generally agree with your point, but it's a general facet of humans, rather than something specific to an issue.

Re: Resignation Letter

#365

Post by epicureanideal »

maxwin wrote: post #345
mikece wrote: post #3

"Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at [the New York Times]: that truth isn't a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else." This is a very key point, and what are the consequences of "informing everyone of a truth" that doesn't accurately reflect -- of even contradicts! -- reality? Harm to the reput…

“Especially at the New York Times” ??? Seriously? How about Fox News. NYT May have some issues but they are still 1000X more accurate and honest than conservative media like Fox News. Media like Fox News is destroying America. That’s the real danger.

Sounds like it's pretty bad at the NY Times.

"My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me a Nazi and a racist; I have learned to brush off comments about how I’m “writing about the Jews again.” Several colleagues perceived to be friendly with me were badgered by coworkers. My work and my character are openly demeaned on company-wide Slack channels where masthead editors regularly weigh in."

Re: Resignation Letter

#366

Post by smsm42 »

slg wrote: post #313
manfredo wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me a Nazi and a racist; I have learned to brush off comments about how I’m “writing about the Jews again.” Several colleagues perceived to be friendly with me were badgered by coworkers. My work and my character are openly demeaned on company-wide Slack channels where masthead edito…

Calling your climate change denying coworker a backwards dumb-ass is not illegal. You can of course be fired for that inappropriate behavior, but it isn't illegal. Weiss specifically called out this behavior as unlawful discrimination. Also it is worth pointing out that Weiss's job was to voice opinions. It is entirely different for someone in that role to face backlash for their bad opinions than it is for someone i…

> Calling your climate change denying coworker a backwards dumb-ass is not illegal

Illegal is when you call the police. There's lots of behaviors that the employer is better to prevent before you have to call the police. If it rose to the level of illegal, there's a lot of things that already went wrong.

> Weiss specifically called out this behavior as unlawful discrimination.

If she was uniquely subjected to harassing and hostile behavior then it's discrimination, by definition. If that treatment is routine for anyone that dares to voice an unorthodox though in NYT, then it's not discrimination - it's just deeply sick and broken culture.

Re: Resignation Letter

#367

Post by koheripbal »

wait_a_minute wrote: post #48
jakelazaroff wrote: post #7

> All this bodes ill, especially for independent-minded young writers and editors paying close attention to what they’ll have to do to advance in their careers. Rule One: Speak your mind at your own peril. Rule Two: Never risk commissioning a story that goes against the narrative. Rule Three: Never believe an editor or publisher who urges you to go against the grain. Eventually, the publisher will cave to the mob, th…

There is a lot of space in-between complete censorship and freedom to be curious. If we were already at complete censorship, she would have been silenced already. Issuing a warning about the trend while we're on the ride towards censorship does not mean there is no trend. That is what she is doing here. She is raising the alarm. If we had to wait to hear an alarm until silencing was the only possibility, there wouldn…

It seems like we're a lot further along the road than that - though perhaps not at the end of it - since this type of behavior is wide-spread.

Re: Resignation Letter

#368

Post by joshuamorton »

AzzieElbab wrote: post #359
joshuamorton wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused: are you saying Marx wasn't a philosopher? Like, disagree with him all you want, but claiming what he did wasn't philosophy is like, a bit extreme.

Marx wasn't around to write history books about subjects like say Zionism

These are words, but I can't perceive any larger meaning from them. Locke, Hobbes, and Kant also weren't alive to write such books, yet they apparently are philosophers? I'd appreciate if if you took the time to put together more than a single sentence.

Re: Resignation Letter

#369

Post by beaner »

maxwin wrote: post #345
mikece wrote: post #3

"Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at [the New York Times]: that truth isn't a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else." This is a very key point, and what are the consequences of "informing everyone of a truth" that doesn't accurately reflect -- of even contradicts! -- reality? Harm to the reput…

“Especially at the New York Times” ??? Seriously? How about Fox News. NYT May have some issues but they are still 1000X more accurate and honest than conservative media like Fox News. Media like Fox News is destroying America. That’s the real danger.

This is a political opinion.

Re: Resignation Letter

#370

Post by manfredo »

slg wrote: post #313
manfredo wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me a Nazi and a racist; I have learned to brush off comments about how I’m “writing about the Jews again.” Several colleagues perceived to be friendly with me were badgered by coworkers. My work and my character are openly demeaned on company-wide Slack channels where masthead edito…

Calling your climate change denying coworker a backwards dumb-ass is not illegal. You can of course be fired for that inappropriate behavior, but it isn't illegal. Weiss specifically called out this behavior as unlawful discrimination. Also it is worth pointing out that Weiss's job was to voice opinions. It is entirely different for someone in that role to face backlash for their bad opinions than it is for someone i…

> Calling your climate change denying coworker a backwards dumb-ass is not illegal. You can of course be fired for that inappropriate behavior, but it isn't illegal.

A correct statement, but one that skirts around the issue at hand: in this situation the people berating their evangelical coworker are creating a hostile workplace environment and the company is obligated to take actions to remidiate this situation. If the climate denier points out this hostile workplace behavior, they're not censoring any particular view. Only the hostile actions of their co-worker.

While Weiss' high profile position makes it much more likely to receive public scrutiny, she is indeed entitled to the same workplace protections as a mid level software developer. Working as a columnist doesn't absolve a company of their legal responsibility to curb workplace harassment. Your workplace is a captive audience. What is legal for some random person to say to you is not at all the same standard that is applied to co-workers. Weiss calling this behavior out as discrimination is not calling any particular belief illegal, only the treatment towards her by her coworkers.

Post reply on HN