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

561–570 of 1001 posts

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

#561

Post by JPKab »

noen wrote: post #508
JPKab wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Kids don't see skin color the way these ideologues do. They look at it like hair color. My twin brother and I were literally the only white kids on our school bus, attending mostly black public schools in a mostly black county in southeastern Virginia. We were never really aware of skin color as a thing, just "this kid let's us borrow his gameboy and is nice", vs. "this kid punches us in the back of the head on…

Through my childhood I would agree with you. By the time I was in high school this was no longer the case. Had many black friends, and once we all pass puberty and got cars, the world changed. The first time I was with a black friend who got pulled over for no reason, and seeing the cop visibly change his demeanor when he saw me (white clean cut male) in the passenger seat, changed me. Talked with my friend after - t…

Walk into a trailer park in Appalachia and talk about white privilege. See what they think.

Not that you've spent a minute of your life in one.

Ever met a coder from that background? Didn't think so.

Class is the issue, but putting it all on race let's the man off the hook, which is why this so called revolution is corporate sponsored.

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

#562

Post by annexrichmond »

ehsankia wrote: post #513
libria wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not fired, just reassigned. I don't even get how that's gonna work. Inevitably, he'll work alongside/under/oversee Jewish colleagues. That'll be an awkward Hangouts meeting. "Oh hey there's the guy that thinks I'm violent, I wonder if he'll judge my work/team interaction impartially..."

It was a post from 14 years he's apologized for. I'm sure everyone has plenty of beliefs from 14 years ago that no longer fits their current beliefs.

True, but it seems like most aren't given a second chance like he was.

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

#563

Post by whimsicalism »

yonixw wrote: post #73
jewnotzionist wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is, of course, true. However part of the problem is that zionists within the state of Israel work really hard to blur this distinction. You can see for example arguments being made in that sense in this debate here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1VTt_THL4A Or the French parliament deciding that anti-Zionism is antisemitism: https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/french-parliamen... Even within Israel the…

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.

> However part of the problem is that zionists within the state of Israel work really hard to blur this distinction.

> 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.

Yes, this is an excellent example of exactly that sort of blurring that GP was talking about, thanks.

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

#564

Post by throwaway894345 »

stickfigure wrote: post #460
germinalphrase wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe the acknowledgement of race or racial difference to be intrinsically bigoted?

It's one thing to acknowledge differences. It's another to define ourselves by them.

Or to conflate "this is true on average for this group of people" with "this is true for everyone in this group".

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

#565

Post by dalbasal »

whimsicalism wrote: post #507
dalbasal wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that Israel is a jewish homeland does not necessarily mean that it is not anyone else's home. It does to some, but they are an extreme minority. It's also contrary to our declaration of independence. I'm not american, but I'll hazard a guess that "certain Native Americans" who take this position are also more often assumed than real.

The history of Israel is centered around a rebellion to prevent the other people who lived there from getting joint rule. Just look at the history - this is the document that prompted the Jewish insurgency in mandatory palestine. [0] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Paper_of_1939#Content

Let me hazard a guess that I know the history of my own country better than you. That doesn't make me right, but don't be condescending.

"history of Israel is centered around" - bollocks.

First, the main faction, which later became the government, did not "rebel" against the British Empire. In fact, they offered to contribute troops and enforced a truce on the grounds that the UK was fighting nazis. It was a minority faction that fought the British, both before and after this event.

Second, nothing about the white papers had anything to do with voting rights. There were no voting rights during the British period. Arabs had voting rights in Israel once Israel existed, but that's neither her nor there. The "rebellion" was about immigration restrictions. More to the point, it was about emigration restrictions, cutting off the last escape route out of the third reich.

Third, the "Palestinian Civil War," as the British called it, had started 10 years prior, shortly after the first partition of Palestine. It started when it became clear the French & British were going to chop the region into nation states and skedaddle.

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

#566

Post by dragonwriter »

theossuary wrote: post #392
donatj wrote: post #55

What I have learned in recent years is how shockingly accepting of antisemitism people apparently are on both sides of aisle. Growing up in a prominently Jewish neighborhood in Minnesota I never really encountered it until maybe ten years ago. The fact that he was just shifted rather than fired in this political environment speaks volumes.

I'm trying to understand what he did that was so wrong? He (correctly imo) called out Israel for its violent tendencies. The only mistake he made that I can see is he conflated Israel with the Jewish people generally. But Israel has a massive propaganda campaign leading people to do exactly that (an attack on Israel the country is an attack on Jewish people in general). If that blogpost was the same, but said Israel,…

> Israel themselves have fostered the narrative that Israel represents the Jewish people by constantly conflating an attack on Israel as an attack on the Jewish people.

Israel’s attempts to equate itself and its current policies with the Jewish race and identity are definitely a reason (an additional reason, on top of many others) to be disgusted at the governing regime of the State of Israel and its government, but they aren't an excuse, even a little bit, for the bigotry against Jews qua Jews for Israeli policy (indeed, that is rewarding the violent bigotry of the Israeli regime, which actively seeks the protection of whataboutism that being able to paint opposition to its apartheid and lebensraum policies as anti-Semitic provides.)

The Israeli government, Israeli Jews, Israelis, and Jews are different groups, and the actions of the first don’t justify hatred of any of the latter groups, all of which include fierce opponents of pretty much any action you might blame thw first for.

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

#567

Post by fighterpilot »

tshaddox wrote: post #500
JPKab wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies are diverse as a side effect of hiring for competence. They aren't competent as a side effect of hiring with diversity as a goal. The statistically illiterate HR minions who preach the correlation between diversity and performance don't get this, because they aren't even educated enough to understand correlation/causation fallacy.

When you’re making products for a diverse group of people, perhaps having a diverse team is required for competence.

That's clearly not the motivation behind it otherwise age and political diversity would be similarly prioritized.

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

#568

Post by johnasmith »

lgleason wrote: post #247

Live by the sword, die by the sword. That said, firing him, like they did with Damore would have been more consistent. Because everyone is under arbitration agreements that always benefit the company, vs the courts where you might have a shot at justice, they have no incentive to do that. As repugnant as his past anti-semitic rant was, people change and sometimes say and do stupid things. In a sane world this guy wou…

Google has stopped mandatory arbitration for all employment disputes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rakeenmabud/2019/02/26/worker-o...

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

#569

Post by slim »

lalaland1125 wrote: post #403

The main thing I find odd about that person's blog post ( https://web.archive.org/web/20210601160519/https://www.kamau... ) is that it also doesn't really make any sense mechanically. The first five paragraphs are all comments on how it must be difficult for a progressive Jew to simultaneously support progressive values and Israel > If I were a Jew today, my sensibilities would be tormented. I would find it increasin…

He was angry. Feeling the injustice of what was happening in Lebanon at that time.

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

#570

Post by NateEag »

Udik wrote: post #441
NateEag wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Jewish != Israeli. How is that hard to understand?

Easy, but then don't pretend that people calling Israel criminal are antisemitic. (Also, let's not pretend there aren't a lot of non Israeli Jews defending Israel whatever it does).

Yup, I don't do that.

The author of the post under discussion made statements about Israel and about Jews.

It's the blanket statements about Jewish people that I'd call anti-semitic.

Post reply on HN