Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The canonical point of a workplace is to come together to fulfill the aims of the entrepreneurs. I disagree. The notion that humans turn into employer-owned production machinery for 8 hours a day is one very particular way to conceptualize work. But it ignores both the individual as a whole person and the society that contains and enables the workplace to function. To me, even as a former and perhaps future entrepr…
I don't think the argument is that it's some separate sphere entirely disconnected from normal human interaction. It's like saying "the point of a movie night is to hang out and enjoy a movie together". If me and my friends were halfway through a movie, and I stood up and staged a loud political protest against something one of the characters said, my friends would be pretty rightfully unhappy with me.
Let's suppose you're black and go over to a white friend's house for movie night. He puts on something super racist (say, Birth of a Nation, or a collection of blackface routines). You object, but all of his guests mock you for being "too sensitive" and "too political". You say, "I'm not sitting here for this," and leave. Were they rightfully unhappy with you?
I would say no, that your friends are assholes. That you aren't obliged to silently endorse your own oppression.
And I think it's the same thing at work. Would I want endless off-topic discussion at work? No. But some of what people denigrate as "too political" is entirely material to the workplace. Indeed, the Basecamp mess shows clearly that "no politics" rules are about suppressing discussion of things that are relevant, and are necessary because they are relevant.