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

Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 1001 posts

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#251

Post by whimsicalism »

refurb wrote: post #225
siculars wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you were your ancestors who were "run out of town on a rail" you would care very, very deeply about your familial bond to Israel. Like yours, my family was run out of town. Unlike yours, many in my family did not run fast enough. If only there was a place they could run to either as first resort or when quota had been reached in other places. If only there was a place that could make running a specific people out…

Despite the downvotes this post has a point - if you want to protect your religion/ethnicity you have to do it yourself. Rise of anti-semitism in Europe - nothing is done Jews seek safety in other countries - immigration denied Holocaust happens - world sympathizes and moves on Israel is under no illusions as to what happens if they don’t have a home and defend it. I kind of don’t blame them for ignoring the worlds c…

> if you want to protect your religion/ethnicity you have to do it yourself.

What should white people be doing if they want to protect their race?

Why the hell does all this tribalist & essentialist nonsense become acceptable when discussion turns to Israel?

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#252

Post by wonderwonder »

lacksconfidence wrote: post #209
wonderwonder wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He said Jew, not Israeli. He is intentional in the use as the entire article is about Jews and Israel. Also the person in question is not an idiot, he is a mature adult smart enough to work in stem at Google. Your argument essentially absolves any anti semitic statements / actions by blaming the Jews for it. This is exactly the definition of anti-semitism, and now I am speaking about your words, not his.

I'm being as clear as i can, when I read the document I don't see anything about "the jewish race". What i see is commentary on the jewish nation of israel. I can only blame israel for bluring that distinction as much as possible.

No need to clarify, I very much understand what you see. The fact that that is what you see is the problem.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#253

Post by vxNsr »

duped wrote: post #190
yonixw wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another part of the problem is when the criticizers forget that Zionism got a huge boost after pogroms on Jewish communities across Europe. So, by criticising Zionism in a middle of a self defense operation in Gaza (as they see it), you look like you don't know its roots and look like they ignoring the Jewish right for self defense.

No one is forgetting the Holocaust or historic pogroms on Jews in Europe when they criticize Israeli military actions or forced displacement.

Speaking with these people on clubhouse recently, I can say they absolutely believe

1) Hitler was right,

but (contradictorily)

2) The Holocaust/Progroms were exaggerated,

and finally

3) there was never any instances of strife in the region before the forming of the state (and if there was it was always the Irgun and nobody else ever).

I’m not saying all people who criticize Israel believe the above but many of the people in “The Balance” room who criticized Israel appeared to.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#254

Post by lawnchair_larry »

literallyWTF wrote: post #31
ostenning wrote: post #6

Here is a classic case of someone conflating the state of Israel and Jewish people and lumping it all together. Plenty of Jewish people that live both inside and outside of Israel are critical of the state. People can be critical of the state of Israel, but they should not be antisemitic. His comments are offensive for this reason.

This is by design. Israel and spent years associating the _state_ of Israel with Judaism. That way you can’t criticize Israel without being labeled and anti-Jewish semite. Nothing he posted was offensive. Israel is an apartheid state

> Israel is an apartheid state

It’s easy to spot people who know less than nothing about the situation when this word shows up. Israel is literally not an apartheid state. “Palestine” is literally an apartheid state. This is a demonstration of supreme ignorance.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#255

Post by wutbrodo »

agentofoblivion wrote: post #67
nazca wrote: post #37

Slightly shocking that he didn't get fired. (yet?) They fired Damore for writing an email that was tone-deaf, insensitive, but largely supported by research. Bobb goes on a clearly antisemitic rant, and just gets reassigned. Is Google inconsistent, or has their policy on how to deal with these things changed over the past few years?

They are entirely consistent. They succumb to pressure from their far left employees, which don’t like insensitivity to the Jews, but abhor any take that conflicts with their “diversity = equal outcomes” nonsense. There is no room for thought even remotely consistent with conservatism, whether or not it’s consistent with scientific consensus.

> far left employees, which don’t like insensitivity to the Jews,

The far left doesn't like insensivity to Jews? Which far left are you thinking of? In the US, the far left is the most reliable source of public anti-Semitism. (Note specifically that I said public. I'm not going to try and divine whether rightwing anti-Semitism is worse in private, which it very well may be.)

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#256

Post by bushbaba »

zpeti wrote: post #199
ostenning wrote: post #6

Here is a classic case of someone conflating the state of Israel and Jewish people and lumping it all together. Plenty of Jewish people that live both inside and outside of Israel are critical of the state. People can be critical of the state of Israel, but they should not be antisemitic. His comments are offensive for this reason.

Israel, a nation with a strong national identity, a small nation not a multinational organisation, generally governed by right wing governments, hugely successful in terms of meritocracy, good entrepreneurial spirit. Filled with a nation of people persecuted for millenia, who have been victims of racism forever, who yet become massively successful, and don't act like victims. Yes, I understand it's a ridiculously ann…

Asians and Jews have both faced discrimination based on their academic success.

What happened in the recent past to American Jews on university quotas and discrimination is now happening to Asian Americans.

The issue is both cases showcase upwards mobility by investing in your future generations. Going against the left belief social mobility is dead.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#257

Post by _-david-_ »

ostenning wrote: post #11
MikeUt wrote: post #2

Odd. You never hear about people fired/removed for anti-white statements. Nick Cannon was an interesting example, where his anti-white remarks went completely ignored: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/nick-cannon-apologizes-for... Edit: To those saying he apologized. Yes, he did - but only to a specific subset of those he insulted: ""First and foremost I extend my deepest and most sincere apologies to my Jewish sist…

The article you have linked said that he got fired. Its literally in the headline: > Nick Cannon apologizes for anti-Semitic remarks after firing

The person you were responding to was trying to say he did not get fired for his anti white remarks.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#258

Post by stickfigure »

steelframe wrote: post #171
ravedave5 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this guy were a CTO or something sure. He was chief diversity officer though, there's gotta be a higher standard there.

In 1998 I was running around Italy telling people that Joseph Smith translated magic transdimensional golden plates that a disembodied Native American spirit materialized for him. Six years later I became an atheist. I've been an atheist for 17 years now. As someone who has personally undergone an extreme change in disposition on something so fundamental with respect to how one views the cosmos, what you did or said…

Do we have any reason to believe the guy has transformed?

Just from reading your one-line description of mormonism, I can tell you are 100% completely genuine. What's the equivalent for Bobb?

Just saying "I regret having posted that" isn't quite the same. Maybe wearing a yamika for a few years would do it, I don't know.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#259

Post by varjag »

rbanffy wrote: post #248
varjag wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think so. There's plenty of states with ongoing ethnic strife, and they do face a lot of deserved criticism. However I can't really recall popular, internationally supported calls for their abolition altogether. The age of state again has not much to with it: for example Lebanon is younger than Israel and has a rich history of ethnic/sectarian conflict. Now there must be people who want to abolish Lebanon, bu…

> for example Lebanon is younger than Israel What people usually find particularly offensive is the de-facto annexation and settlement of territories that exceed the UN resolution that created the State of Israel, along with the complete imbalance in both military power and casualties of both sides. It's not just ethnic/sectarian conflict. In many aspects, it would qualify as genocide.

Well, Syria is just across the border with genocide (not just as rhetorical device) very much ongoing. Military imbalance a plenty. Anyone up for dissolving it yet?

Hell, even outright Nazism wasn't deemed a reason enough to dissolve Germany (although at some point it was seriously considered).

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#260

Post by throwaway894345 »

myfavoritedog wrote: post #113
ostenning wrote: post #6

Here is a classic case of someone conflating the state of Israel and Jewish people and lumping it all together. Plenty of Jewish people that live both inside and outside of Israel are critical of the state. People can be critical of the state of Israel, but they should not be antisemitic. His comments are offensive for this reason.

People can be critical of the state of Israel, but they should not be antisemitic. Theoretically, I guess, but it's really strange how the one tiny country in the whole world that has a Jewish-dominated society is so often a target for complete destruction. Many of the same countries that have all but eliminated their own Jewish populations somehow find Israel's very existence to be unpalatable, going after them in t…

> But as a matter of probability, a lot of people who criticize Israel are also antisemitic.

Agreed. In practice, antizionists (folks who believe that Israel shouldn't exist) virtually are virtually always antisemitic. Whatever you think of him, Bret Stephens makes a pretty insightful analogy that it's like how there could theoretically be segregationists that aren't racist, but they don't exist in practice.

That said, there's a distinction to be made between antizionism (i.e., "Israel shouldn't exist") and criticism of Israel (e.g., "Israel's settlement policy violates human rights"). The former is de facto (but not de jure) antisemitism while the latter is not.

EDIT: I'm getting a lot of downvotes for this, I'm guessing I've offended a lot of people who identify strongly with antizionism/antisemitism. My intention wasn't offense, but rather observation. That said, I make no apology for any offense taken--enjoy my Internet Points! (:

Post reply on HN