491–500 of 901 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, I have seen a coworker strongly imply that someone is a white nationalist for suggesting that it’s possible to be a non-racist republican.
Thanks for the anecdote. Was a reminder of "let's be respectful, now!" good enough to solve the problem?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It could be a reason, but it's a different issue - for women and ethnic minorities it's clear how many of them there are. However, for conservatives it's an open question of whether they really are underrepresented or they seem underrepresented because they're hiding their viewpoint. Perhaps a more useful parallel would be sexual orientation a couple decades ago, where there used to be all kinds of policies like "don…
Conservatives control the executive and legislative branches of government, and are therefore extremely well represented nationally. Meanwhile you’re comparing this to closeted gay people decades ago. Maybe it’s not politics that gets you into trouble, it just seems that some people will never be dominant enough for their tastes.
Equality of opportunities/rights for the particular individual wherever they may be, not attempting to get equality of outcomes for the aggregate by harming individual rights or justifying local oppression by some wider goal.
If a gay person has to hide their orientation, it's bad - not because gays need protection, but because that individual is restricted.
If someone has to hide their religion, it's bad - not because that religion needs protection, but because that person gets restricted.
If someone has to hide their political affiliation - same thing, no matter if it's support of some presidential candidate, legalization or criminalization of some drug, support for or against unions, etc, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The argument here is that people like you label anything you don't agree with as "intolerant" and justify social lynching of the ideas based on your likely angry or frustrated emotional assessment. This didn't start with James, although that's one of the more popular incidents. Disagreeing with operational policies that are based on politically charged ideas that we need to correct for the inequalities in outcomes ra…
No, intolerance is a specific term of art here, not just anything lefties don't like. For example, look at the US right's decades-long pursuit of anti-GLBTQ policies. Gay people mostly just want to be left alone to live their lives. the US right wants to use the power of the state to discriminate against them. It went so far in California that Prop 8 specifically rewrote the constitution to strip the right of equal p…
The victim card being played here is quite pathetic. A religous conservative who is told they can’t discriminate against gay people claims you need tolerate and respect his intolerance and disrespect because of religious freedom.
Someone who benefitted from privilege, or born into an upper middle class household, claims discrimination if they write a screed on merit against their coworkers and suffer from it because of efforts to reach out and broaden the applicant base.
The “echo chamber” being complained about are broadly shared cultural values we expect Americans to hold, beliefs in All Men Are Created Equal, that really aren’t normal subjects of debate. The only issue debatable is the best policies to maintain them.
Many of the complaints don’t argue for how to achieve it, rather they take a rather extremist view of meritocracy and hyperindividualism like they just graduated from Ayn Rand University and try to apply it to the very messy real world.
Is it too much to ask to just do your work and if you don’t like policies against sexual harassment or racial or queer harassment at your company to go work somewhere that tolerates it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
dude, if it's implausible for you to imagine expressing your beliefs without being labelled a bigot, that's a red flag about your beliefs.
So pro-choice activists are bigots if they're in deeply conservative parts of the US? If it's implausible for someone to imagine expressing their beliefs without being labelled a bigot then it's just as much a statement about the environment they're in as it is about the beliefs in question.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Conservatives control the executive and legislative branches of government, and are therefore extremely well represented nationally. Meanwhile you’re comparing this to closeted gay people decades ago. Maybe it’s not politics that gets you into trouble, it just seems that some people will never be dominant enough for their tastes.
It's not about who is dominant, it's about the fundamental right of the non-dominant minority (whatever that is in any particular place and time) to express themselves and not having to hide. Equality of opportunities/rights for the particular individual wherever they may be, not attempting to get equality of outcomes for the aggregate by harming individual rights or justifying local oppression by some wider goal. If…
You have every right to speak, and people have the same right to speak against you. I don’t agree with the kind of treatment someone like Jacob Rees Mogg received when he tried to speak at a university, but someone like Thiel? To hell with him.
In any case, this sounds more like other people's distaste is slowly grinding Thiel down and he's just trying to rationalise it to himself with talk of echo chambers and whatnot. You'd think he'd have more sympathy for minorities who have had to put up with that from birth but he does come across as someone who is frustrated when others don't subscribe to his exceptionalist view of himself.
It's not SV, it's Coventry he doesn't like, and he'll be sent there wherever he goes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the conservative claim to being "silenced" is a reflection of privilege. for instance, the icon here is Peter Thiel, a billionaire who complains about being victimized because people tell him he's in the wrong. you will and should face ostracism and other consequences for saying, believing, and doing things that people find abhorrent or evil. free speech means you're free to believe those things, and everybody else i…
This is the exact type of commentary the article is talking. This conservative strawman you’ve built is far from average. In this absurd, inflammatory commentary replace the conservative boogeyman with a Muslim boogeyman or a gay boogeyman and realize you’re using the exact same type of rhetoric as the people you despise
I don't get it. I grew up in Silicon Valley and I work in tech, and so do many other people I know. They run the gamut from far-left socialists to libertarians to own a bunch of guns. They have all kinds of ethnic backgrounds and religious views. Some of my most libertarian/pro-gun friends have not been shy about their political views and it hasn't hurt their tech careers at all. They are far more welcome here than l…
I work in the Bay Area and I have personally worked with (as in, on the same team with and working directly in cooperation. CEOs, founders, etc. are not included in this count), exactly one person who discussed their conservative views. This is in comparison to hundreds of liberals. Sure, you may be able to identify at least one person on variety of ends of the political spectrum, but I don't think anyone can sanely…
I'm 37 and, God, people treat me like I'm a dinosaur. I've been programming C for 25 years and it's hard to relate to young people who don't know what a machine register is. We can argue about it, I can get downvoted, whatever. I moved out of the Bay Area after 5 years, and to be honest, the divide between where I am and where the ideological center of Silicon Valley has drifted just continues to get wider. It has li…
>> Silicon Valley is overrun by techno-utopians. That's what it sounds like to me too. I find it particularly hard to reconcile claims of liberalism, or even libertarianism, with an industry led by Google, Amazon and Facebook, companies that basically make money by running roughshod over their users' privacy.