Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only if you have "incorrect" opinions.
There's not a lot of reward even for the bien pensant.
[deleted]
New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity
201–210 of 734 posts
Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the expectation of being able to say anything and not be responsible for it, is what's wrong. Say what you want, but be prepared to stand by it and take responsibility for it, in a court of law if necessary. Free speech is a right, and thus it requires the person exercising that right to understand that it does not absolve them from being held responsible for what they say or express. Just like the 2nd amendment…
I'm not really sure what the amendments to the US constitution have to do with a post about British workplaces, but I think you have a very different view on "freedom of speech" than the classically liberal one that it is arguably founded upon. That's OK, of course. In the UK we don't have and have never had freedom of speech. In fact, we have some of the harshest libel laws in the world. There are very many conseque…
I'm not from the US either, however I wanted to frame the argument in a way that would be understandable to the majority on this site.
> "But this post is about people self-censoring their opinions, particularly in the workplace, for fear of repercussions, and that is something that absolutely is getting worse. Like many others I steer clear of all of these topics myself, as even though I hold "approved" opinions on them."
In a way, this gives you just a little perspective on how homosexual people have felt for millennia, in fact how anyone with a sexuality, religion, political view or any other aspect that was sufficiently divergent from the status quo have been treated for millennia. In many parts of the world, some of those things still carry death sentences, and it's not very long ago that this was also the case in our western countries.
Being told that ones views are "not cool, dude" is extremely mild, and the threat of doxxing is wildly overblown, unless you are an actual political activist. And in that case, it still a lot more dangerous being an ultra-woke leftie than a white supremacist, considering the cases we've seen of violent attacks, car rammings at protests and so on.
> "I fear that someone may wilfully misinterpret something I say and cause me irreparable harm by going on some weird crusade to have me fired and my life ruined, as that seems to be what normally happens these days."
I'm sorry, but that is just horse manure. You hear of a small handful of cases, which are given completely overblown coverage in the media, because outrage sells. That is not an accurate representation of the world, it is a twisted media picture. It is especially bad in the UK, where the big media is overwhelmingly conservative.
As someone who probably agrees with you on a number of things, being of an old-school leftist persuasion (trade unions, progressive taxation, wealth taxes, completely legalize weed, trust that people have good intentions at heart, judge people by their actions, not by where they happened to be born), and someone who interacts with a lot of different companies from all over the spectrum, I simply cannot recognize your argument that people who don't hold "woke leftist" views are discriminated against.
On the contrary, there is still a undercurrent of conservative and somewhat xenophobic attitude at a lot of manual labor and otherwise "blue collar" workplaces. It has gotten a lot better, but it is still present.
Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity
#203> Only nine percent of the British adults we surveyed described politics as “very important” to their sense of identity, and only 22 percent had shared any political content on their social channels in the previous year > When it comes to speaking their minds at work, one of these tribes—home of the “Progressive Activist”—is not like the others. “A powerful and vocal group for whom politics is at the core of their id…
Should companies cater to racists?
One thing I learned after 10 years of being vegetarian: antagonism is a a loosing strategy.
Shaming and tribalism doesn't help anybody, and is an arrogant view of the world.
You are probably some *ist right now, compared to a future world view.
Just because people have an opinion you know is unwise doesn't make them a bad person. They are like you. You are more like them than you think, but like them you have blind spots that prevent you from seeing it. Tolerance goes both way.
We all create suffering, at different scales and in different manners.
The idea is not to cater to racists, but just to make sure their believes does not translate to hurtful actions in the work place. If it doesn't, then it's ok, they probably tolerate stupid things on your part too.
If it does, then first, try to engage with them to make it stop.
Only if it doesn't work, should you reject them.
Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
Punching people in the face is illegal regardless of the reason - I don't really see how that's relevant? Are you really saying that it should be impossible for someone to lose their job over what they say? If someone, for example, threatened to kill a co-worker, you don't think they should be fired? I appreciate that this is an extreme example, but when we talk about rights, don't we have to cover all examples of sp…
> you don't have a right to a job. In non-America places (or in the few remaining unionised workplaces in America) you typically have some right to due process, and you can't just be terminated on a whim because you said something the boss didn't like.
Yes, and I think that's a good thing. But I don't see think that's incompatible with my view here - that freedom of speech doesn't mean I have the right to say anything and expect to keep my job.
If I was to say something offensive, I should be accorded due process, but the result of that process may be that I'm let go.
Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the expectation of being able to say anything and not be responsible for it, is what's wrong. Say what you want, but be prepared to stand by it and take responsibility for it, in a court of law if necessary. Free speech is a right, and thus it requires the person exercising that right to understand that it does not absolve them from being held responsible for what they say or express. Just like the 2nd amendment…
Above I said: > Meaning that, Yes, you do have the right of free speach, but No, you should not be saying the wrong things. I would argue, that you do disagree with what I said. You are just providing reasons why it is acceptable for why you should not be saying the wrong things.
You can say as many wrong things as you want, but you cannot expect that there will be no consequences.
Those consequences range from people not wishing to associate with you anymore at the mildest end, to actual fines and jail time, if your speech can be proven to have directly incited violence (the bar for which various according to country and jurisdiction).
You can't just claim that "I have no control over these words that are coming out of my mouth, and I take no responsibility for them", free speech doesn't work like that.
And if your strongest argument for saying something is "I have the right to say this", then maybe reconsider whether it's actually worth saying.
Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
Punching people in the face is illegal regardless of the reason - I don't really see how that's relevant? Are you really saying that it should be impossible for someone to lose their job over what they say? If someone, for example, threatened to kill a co-worker, you don't think they should be fired? I appreciate that this is an extreme example, but when we talk about rights, don't we have to cover all examples of sp…
> Punching people in the face is illegal regardless of the reason - I don't really see how that's relevant? The 'freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences' was popularized (repopularized?) and became a somewhat mainstream talking point in America around 2016-17 to justify political violence with the "punch a nazi" thing and stuff. It's the "paradox of tolerance".
I think it was popularized in the USA by the first amendment
> FREEDOM of speech is a constitutional guarantee. But that doesn't mean it is absolute or not subject to some limitations
one important thing is that the burden of the proof is on the accusers.
it was "repopularized" because there were literally nazis killing people in the streets, you should be aware that being a nazi it's a crime almost everywhere in the western World (except US) and that nazi usually hide themselves behind the "you should prove that hate speech against the jews is a crime"
So the broader definition of freedom of speech AND the consequences is a consequence of nazis taking over the public discourse, not the contrary.
Yes, it's the paradox of tolerance.
Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity
#207I consider myself a very politically informed person. I'm not a politically active person however, largely for the reasons mentioned in the article. I considered myself a liberal by the standards of the time I grew up in. My views on some social issues, particularly 'free speech', are considered a conservative now. I am one of the people the article is concerning who will not publicly voice their political opinions i…
I would say that this is a failure of philosophy in political leadership. Not that philosophy was ever paramount in politics, but it was at least expected in the highest classes. Everything devolves into tribalism without philosophy. It looks like people are discoursing, but they are really just signalling.
Politics in English-speaking countries, particularly the US, seems to have partly become entertainment. Some of the "fans" appear more fervent than even the politicians themselves.
I'm an outsider and even I've been drawn into US politics, because it is entertaining. Sometimes it's more entertaining than a fictional story. But I doubt that this makes for sensible governing.
Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity
#208I consider myself a very politically informed person. I'm not a politically active person however, largely for the reasons mentioned in the article. I considered myself a liberal by the standards of the time I grew up in. My views on some social issues, particularly 'free speech', are considered a conservative now. I am one of the people the article is concerning who will not publicly voice their political opinions i…
Looking at UK politics…
It's funny how people who are conservative claim their right to free speech is being curtailed when at the same time they're busy curtailing the rights of people who aren't like them - immigrants, non-Cis, non-white people, climate change protesters etc.
Oh and let's not forget that the conservatives in the UK branded the likely implications of Brexit as “project fear”
Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity
#209I consider myself a very politically informed person. I'm not a politically active person however, largely for the reasons mentioned in the article. I considered myself a liberal by the standards of the time I grew up in. My views on some social issues, particularly 'free speech', are considered a conservative now. I am one of the people the article is concerning who will not publicly voice their political opinions i…
> how willingly other people bring up politically sensitive issues in the workplace I'd say I'm a mix of conservative/Libertarian and this kind of blows my mind over the past few years. It seems like I constantly hear people on the left openly voicing their political opinions around crowds of people, and always speak in a way that they genuinely believe everyone around them agrees....and often have a condescending wa…
It sounds like you're saying "I only see these leftists using extremely shallow reasoning, and they don't understand that they're wrong because they don't look at my/our reasoning beyond a shallow level."
If you would look for more depth in the reasoning of the people you're disagreeing with yourself, you might be surprised at what you might find. The frustration you're expressing to me seems to be very symmetric, occurring on both sides of the spectrum.
Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Even correcting people who are clearly misinformed on clear matters of fact can cause offense. This is so true. I've seen polling showing that large numbers of people believe that the number of unarmed black men fatally shot by American police every year is in the "thousands" or even "tens of thousands". And the further to the left the media people consume, the higher they're likely to believe the number is. The ac…
I upvoted you because I don't think you should be downvoted for expressing your opinion. But I also think we should wonder: how many white armed men were killed?
Did I express an opinion? I'm pretty sure I just quoted a statistic.
But since you asked: American police kill white men (including unarmed white men) at the same rate at which they kill black men, once you control for crime rate and poverty. But police killings of white men don't become national news.
Tony Timpa died in near-identical circumstances to George Floyd. Ask yourself why you haven't heard of him. Or Ryan Whitaker, or Daniel Shaver.
(Does the overrepresentation of black men among criminals and the poor have anything to do with racism? Obviously it does, and I'm happy to discuss it in good faith. But I've probably derailed the thread enough already.)