Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces • Hacker News Board

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

#321

Post by gotostatement » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

it makes me sick to see everyone thinking that this is proof of cancel culture - LOOK THE DIVERSITY GUY WAS HOISTED BY HIS OWN DIVERSITY PETARD!

NO. The people calling for this are not progressives - look them up - Simon Wiesenthal Center and Stop Antisemitism are conservative zionist organizations who equate anti-zionism with anti-semitism. As far as I can tell Kamau Bobb's post was anti-zionist, NOT anti-semitic at all. If you read the passages you will see.

This is a cancellation by the original proponents of cancellation: conservatives supporting an entrenched power structure.

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

#322

Post by antisemtexism » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

zpeti wrote: post #133

logicchains wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Is Google inconsistent, or has their policy on how to deal with these things changed over the past few years? Simple explanation is Google's Democrat-leaning leadership are more aligned with Bobb than Damore (in the US, the left are generally anti-Israel while the right support it, and the left are pro-affirmative-action while the right oppose it).

This is the correct answer. The amount of anti-semitism shown during this recent Hamas Israel conflict in the woke left has been very worrying. We are likely to see a big resurgence of anti-semitism in the next period. It's more and more socially acceptable on the left.

Criticism of Israel's apartheid policies isn't antisemitism. It's such nonsense how the two have been conflated in recent years.

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

#323

Post by joelbluminator » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

rightorwrong128 wrote: post #47

I really can't tell if this is right or wrong. On one hand, these comments are hurtful and obviously stupid. On the other hand, this post is 13 years old. We all say or think stupid things sometimes, especially when we're naive about a topic. Isn't it possible his stance has changed? All this publicity now may have ruined this guy's career forever, all because the scribbled down some random stupid thoughts more than…

This is how it works now, yes it's extreme. But if you say something demeaning over women or blacks the response is much much worse. Here the guy just got transferred to another cushy job with big pay, not even fired. Jews are fair game unfortunately

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

#324

Post by myfavoritedog » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

devtul wrote: post #236

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…

> how the one tiny country in the whole world This tactic of saying "oh try to find Israel on the map, it's so tiny, oh poor state of Israel" is often pushed by Zionists, also often trying to link anti-zionism with anti-semitism. I saw a talk with Ruth Wisse, a professor at Harvard University pushing this narrative.

Because the argument has validity.

If Israel weren't Jewish, nobody would care about it. You can go line by line describing Israel and its so-called "atrocities" and I'll show you countries that are far more appropriately accused of those types of atrocities... yet those other countries never make it into the international news cycle.

I'm not Jewish. I'm not religious.

But the singling out of Israel by political/antisemitic forces has not escaped my notice.

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

#325

Post by yoavm » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #273

joelbluminator wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I thought it was the UN that decided the country should be split into two states, where one would have a Jewish majority and the other would have an Arab majority. When did people rebel against imposing a majority-rule democracy?

Last time I checked Israel just changed the prime minister after having an election, while Palestine had its last election in 2006 and chose a party that literally killed its opponents.

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

#326

Post by JansjoFromIkea » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

rsj_hn wrote: post #189

JansjoFromIkea wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the blog post is definitely worse than Damore's email (although I thought it was pretty crappy in itself), but you're talking here about a blog post from 2007 and an email that was sent via company channels while he was working there. I can only imagine Bobb was quite apologetic and a lot more aware of how terrible his conflations are there than he was in 2007. That's also 14 years of time to have solid evide…

No Damore sent supposedly confidential feedback when solicited to do so by diversity trainers. That content so enraged the diversity staff they leaked it to the rest of the company. Perhaps Damore was naive in thinking the feedback about diversity training was welcome or confidential, but he definately did not send a company-wide email to anyone.

"Damore emailed his memo to the organisers of Google’s diversity meetings in early July. When there was no response, he started sending the document to Google’s internal mailing lists and forums, eager for a reaction."

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/16/james-dam...

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

#327

Post by balls187 » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

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.

That is an absurd argument.

Replace "Jew" with "Krogan..."

The blog post took aim at Jewish people, not the policies of Israeli government.

Even it's title "If I were a Jew" is problematic.

https://masseffect.fandom.com/wiki/Krogan

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

#328

Post by NateEag » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

mavsman wrote: post #90

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.

Ya, I wonder at what point someone is accepted as having changed.

It helps some if they've ever actually claimed to have changed.

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

#329

Post by rsj_hn » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

balls187 wrote: post #298

rsj_hn wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No Damore sent supposedly confidential feedback when solicited to do so by diversity trainers. That content so enraged the diversity staff they leaked it to the rest of the company. Perhaps Damore was naive in thinking the feedback about diversity training was welcome or confidential, but he definately did not send a company-wide email to anyone.

I think the point being made was Damore's email was sent using company resources, while employed by the company, presumably on company time. Bobb's blog post was from 2007.

He was using company resources to respond to a company request for him to provide feedback to a company event.

When the company asks you "tell me what you think about the content of our diversity training, we promise your response is confidential and we are interested in hearing what you have to say", and you respond with an evidence based argument that the diversity training is incorrect, then this is a very different situation from the head of diversity making public comments on a blog. Remember Damore was a non-management developer.

If you are going to fire people for their views, which is what apparently Google has no problem doing, then the Damore situation is much less justifiable than this situation and the person with the offending views was not even fired.

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

#330

Post by whimsicalism » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

cjohnson318 wrote: post #311

whimsicalism wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, people on the Left haven't realized women's innate biological tendency towards neuroticism, which renders affirmative action self-defeating.

> women's innate biological tendency towards neuroticism What the actual... Are you serious right now? Men kill women and other men at much, much higher rates than women kill men or other women. What does that say about the the "innate biological tendencies" of men?

Of course not.

I was seeing how far people would go with Damore, and it really saddens me how much my comment was upvoted. People here are the type of people I work with... they all hold these views?

Of course, now that I've clarified, I expect the Damore-types to downvoted my comment, it peaked at +5.