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

271–280 of 1001 posts

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

#271

Post by davemel37 »

chevill wrote: post #205
myfavoritedog wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. This is a meaningless statement though. We can expect that nearly anyone that's antisemitic would be critical of a country run and mostly inhabited by Jewish people. It becomes a problem when people try to extrapolate that fact to dismiss every criticism of Israel as "this guy's probably just antisemitic." Its only true as a m…

"people should stop using accusations of bigotry as a weapon to silence people"

Huh? Are you seriously calling someones words who feels victimized, a weapon? Are you seriously holding fear of actual violence to an unsubstantiated standard?

"If you want to call someone a bigot, its pretty important to make sure you are right about it."

Please show me one other form of bigotry accusation you hold to the same standard.

This perspective is almost certainly a blindspot. Im not certain - but I definitely would not rely on you to stand up or defend folks from actual antisemitism.

How do people even think, let alone say these things and not get called out by everyone immediately?

Do you actually and critically think this is true or even appropriate to say?

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

#272

Post by tolbish »

sanity31415 wrote: post #197
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 fired Damore for writing an email that was tone-deaf, insensitive, but largely supported by research Damore was asked for his feedback on Google's diversity policies, and that's exactly what he provided. Most of Damore's critics haven't actually read his memo[1], but rather formed an opinion based on the character assassination campaign against him, a campaign his employer publicly sided with. Over the 4 years…

People take issue with the following, but I don't recall Google confirming/denying if it is true:

I strongly believe in gender and racial diversity, and I think we should strive for more. However, to achieve a more equal gender and race representation, Google has created several discriminatory practices:

● Programs, mentoring, and classes only for people with a certain gender or race

● A high priority queue and special treatment for “diversity” candidates

● Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate

● Reconsidering any set of people if it’s not “diverse” enough, but not showing that same scrutiny in the reverse direction (clear confirmation bias)

● Setting org level OKRs for increased representation which can incentivize illegal discrimination

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

#273

Post by whimsicalism »

joelbluminator wrote: post #242
door101 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Because it’s a colonial ethnostate, with massive support from the United States. Israel (the colonial ethnostate) should not exist. Palestine is not an ethnostate, it is the name for the multicultural, multi-ethnic state who rightfully control…

> colonial A colony of what empire exactly? Jews were a group of massacred refugees. > massive support from the United States There is no massive support from the United States actually, at least not monetary. There is military help that is needed because Israel's enemies want to destroy it, still to this day. And it's not that big compared to Israel's gdp (4 billion to 400 gdp = 1%) and is completely meaningless to…

The US doesn't have a law that says "you can immigrate and be a citizen but only if you are white"

Also, the US wasn't born out of a revolution against equal voting rights for people regardless of national origin, Israel, like Rhodesia at the time, was.

In both cases, minority groups rebelled against British attempts to impose majority-rule democracy, Israel has just succeeded more than Rhodesia did at the time.

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

#274

Post by lawnchair_larry »

KittenInABox wrote: post #54
gadders wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>People can be critical of the state of Israel, but they should not be antisemitic. As long as you (the general you, not you specifically) subject all countries that (allegedly) mistreat their citizens or neighbouring countries to the same level of criticism. When you single out the world's only Jewish state for criticism it looks kinda racist.

South Africa's Apartheid was condemned as human injustice, so should Israel's Apartheid, no?

“Israel’s Apartheid” is not a thing, unless you mean the fact that there are zero jews in Palestinian territory. Yes, “the squad” lied to you again.

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

#275

Post by SEJeff »

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.

Precisely.

Being jewish does not mean you are a zionist. Being a zionist does not mean you are jewish (many evangelicals in the US's "south" are staunch zionists).

You can want the palestinians to have basic human rights and still be pro-Israeli state.

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

#276

Post by loveistheanswer »

agentofoblivion wrote: post #40

Only the purest of the pure can lead a diversity effort. And it doesn’t count unless you were pure from the beginning. Growing to overcome past problems is not sufficient.

>Growing to overcome past problems is not sufficient.

Their assumption is moreso that we cant grow to overcome past problems. So the only way to build themselves up is to tear others down.

Thats why the popular "anti-racism" philosophy is so antithetical to and ignorant of the lives and philosophies of many of the greatest civil rights leaders such as Frederick Douglass, Booker T Washington, and MLK.

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

#277

Post by throwusawayus »

lacksconfidence wrote: post #165
wonderwonder wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is Anti-Semitic in that he is lumping all jews in with Israel. I am a Jew, America is my homeland. I live here and am an American. I am not an Israeli. I give almost zero thought to Israel in my day to day. Jews are consistently labeled with an "other" tag, we are not Americans, we are Jews and Israel is our country. Also "If I were a Jew I would be concerned about my insatiable appetite for war and killing in def…

Replace jew with 'israeli' in every occurance. Who's fault is it that israel intentionally tried to muddy the water and make the word confusing? I don't see any anti-semitism here. I see here concern that israel does not care about the humanity of their neighbors.

I'm Jewish, and I personally found the post to be offensive and anti-semitic.

Israel is not my "homeland". I've never been to Israel, let alone lived there. My parents have never been to Israel. You'd have to go back over 2000 years to find an ancestor of mine who lived in Israel. I have no connection whatsoever with the actions of the Israeli government. So if you attribute their actions to me, simply because I am Jewish, that is by definition racist and anti-semitic.

Imagine if the non-black head of diversity at a major US corporation wrote a post titled "If I were Black", directly tying the actions of modern-day African governments to all African Americans. Or a post titled "If I were Catholic" doing the same thing to all US Catholics based on actions of the Vatican or even just the Pope. This sort of thing happened in the US decades ago and was acceptable then, but is not even remotely acceptable now, nor was it acceptable when this post was written.

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

#278

Post by 6321throwaway »

colordrops wrote: post #180
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.

Honest question here - how do you criticize Judaism the religion without being called a bigot? Christians and Muslims are fair game for discourse. Is the Jewish religion and its followers not fair to criticize? They have many of the same arcane and backwards beliefs as other Abrahamic religions.

> To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.

— Voltaire

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

#279

Post by whimsicalism »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #176
door101 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Because it’s a colonial ethnostate, with massive support from the United States. Israel (the colonial ethnostate) should not exist. Palestine is not an ethnostate, it is the name for the multicultural, multi-ethnic state who rightfully control…

This is incredibly ignorant of the history of the region. It’s also patently untrue. The amount of misinformation that westerners propagate about Israel and “Palestine”, which has never been a country, constantly amazes me.

"never been a country" -> except for the 138 countries that do recognize it as a country.

Moreover, why is this a strong rejoinder? Black South Africa was never recognized as a country either, does that mean there was no moral concern?

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

#280

Post by mooseburger »

mc32 wrote: post #145
Gunax wrote: post #20

I support his speech, I just despise the hypocrisy. Nevermind that this position has an unwritten rule that it must be occupied by a minority.

Not exactly. The ex-Apple DO was fired because she offered an opinion that was considered heretical, though I think it was an uncontroversial claim.

Yeah, that was interesting. Apparently even being a female POC doesn't allow you to blaspheme against the nameless faith. It has evolved.
Post reply on HN