The "alt right" builds their own crowdfunding site: HATREON. Kinda says it all...
2
The Alt-Right is not seeking First Amendment privileges. It is seeking the right to publicize its bigotry and hatred. Their complaints are guano, without meaning or substance. If a business wants to promote an inclusive ethos amongst its workers, it can do so. The exception is when the business owns, for example, a town, and the town square becomes in essence the public square. The employee can go on Facebook or some other social media website and publish his bigotry and hatred; he has no right to access a company forum with comments that demean other employees.
4
"positing that biological differences explained the tech industry’s gender gap"
This is not a fair description of what the memo (which I have read) says. It says that such differences probably explain PART of the "gap."
I read both the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal every day. I am afraid that the Journal (whose editorials I generally disagree with strongly) has managed to separate its editorial policy from its reporting much better than the Times does. (I also frequently disagree with the Times editorials and op-eds, but for different reasons.)
I recommend that Times readers who would like to see a thoughtful alternate perspective on the infamous memo read Mona Charen's column, which I think summarizes the gist of the memo fairly: https://townhall.com/columnists/monacharen/2017/08/08/google-burns-a-her... .
Or maybe even (shudder!) try reading the memo itself, which is easily available if you Google it (ironically).
This is not a fair description of what the memo (which I have read) says. It says that such differences probably explain PART of the "gap."
I read both the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal every day. I am afraid that the Journal (whose editorials I generally disagree with strongly) has managed to separate its editorial policy from its reporting much better than the Times does. (I also frequently disagree with the Times editorials and op-eds, but for different reasons.)
I recommend that Times readers who would like to see a thoughtful alternate perspective on the infamous memo read Mona Charen's column, which I think summarizes the gist of the memo fairly: https://townhall.com/columnists/monacharen/2017/08/08/google-burns-a-her... .
Or maybe even (shudder!) try reading the memo itself, which is easily available if you Google it (ironically).
9
When it comes to liberal orthodoxy, The Times' reporting and opinions cannot be separated, hence its conflation of disagreement with Google with dangerous thinking and the alt-right.
Imagine the series of articles that could be written about the "enemies of the far left"? Too many groups to name, and one gets on the list for simply holding an unpopular viewpoint or disagreeing.
Imagine the series of articles that could be written about the "enemies of the far left"? Too many groups to name, and one gets on the list for simply holding an unpopular viewpoint or disagreeing.
9
"There is a certain poetic justice in the alt-right, largely an internet-based political movement, turning against the companies that enabled it in the first place."
-------
"Poetic justice?" That doesn't really fit in this context. "Irony" is more likely what the reporter should have been looking for.
-------
"Poetic justice?" That doesn't really fit in this context. "Irony" is more likely what the reporter should have been looking for.
2
The left's viewpoint is sexist against males and racist against whites and it often shows itself in attempts to somehow blame the lower representation of women and black people in STEM occupations on "white racism." That results in a hostile corporate culture of shaming and blaming white men and discrimination against them with affirmative action programs favoring women and minorities.
7
The "Alt-Right" Ain't-Right ... in more ways than one .... Sad!
1
Seems like the film "Hidden Figures" needs to be watched again by Mr. Damore... and the rest of Google. Women can do math and science just as well and even better than men when given the right encouragement and opportunity. Boys get steered into these fields, girls often don't. There's your "biological differences."
6
I loved the film, and I'm sympathetic to your views, but I fear they represent mostly wishful thinking. There is a mountain of data that shows gender-specific differences in some categories of aptitudes, even after allowing for social expectations. One example: math SAT scores show a remarkably constant average disparity of about 30 points between males and females over a 40 year time span, and across all ethnic groups.
Of course, these are averages only and have no bearing on individual aptitudes. There are plenty of female math geniuses in the world, and plenty of male math morons. For a company like Google, which chooses employees from the upper tail end of the distribution, averages over the whole population don't really matter, one way or the other. What does matter, however, is how the company treats its brainy cherry-picked employees, both male and female, and that's what all the furor is about.
Of course, these are averages only and have no bearing on individual aptitudes. There are plenty of female math geniuses in the world, and plenty of male math morons. For a company like Google, which chooses employees from the upper tail end of the distribution, averages over the whole population don't really matter, one way or the other. What does matter, however, is how the company treats its brainy cherry-picked employees, both male and female, and that's what all the furor is about.
3
I suppose liberals at Google also believe that the science on biological differences is "settled." How else to explain firing someone for holding the "incorrect" view? This assumes there is a "correct" view, which is backed up by extensive scientific research.
The "Diversity VP" at Google must be quite the scientific expert.
The "Diversity VP" at Google must be quite the scientific expert.
8
This sort of disgraceful, eugenics-inspired pseudoscience is sadly once again in vogue, thanks to scientifically illiterate neocons like Sam Harris and their resurrection of long-discredited phonies like Charles Murray of The Bell Curve fame. Their nonsense has no basis in reality and has been ripped to pieces by are veritable army of preeminent biologists. That doesn't stop alt-righters (in other words, Republicans) from accepting this drivel as empirical gospel. I'd have preferred if Google released a statement debunking this silly memo and proving it is without scientific merit, rather than making an alt-right martyr of this misguided fellow.
6
" I'd have preferred if Google released a statement debunking this silly memo and proving it is without scientific merit,"
And why did they NOT do just that? Because you can't disprove science with ideology. Google's untenable stance rests on the premise that women are under-represented in their field because of systemic sexism. And while they enforce policies to favor women (and, incidentally, minorities) in hiring, they still fail to meet their own quotas in either category. In a world ruled by logic, that would mean that their assumptions about sexism and racism are either unfounded, or less relevant to the situation than they believed. Instead of facing that reality, they decided to suppress the voice pointing to where their theory about under-representation, and the curative policies meant to correct the situation, went wrong. Which leads me to believe that Google actually has no will to address the problem of female under-representation, and prefers to stick to the current policy of pretending to denounce what's wrong, continuing to pretend to address the problem, while knowingly (intentionally?) failing miserably.
This kind of deception reminds of the Democrats in general: pretending to represent and fight for the Middle-class while technically sacrificing it for special interests.
And why did they NOT do just that? Because you can't disprove science with ideology. Google's untenable stance rests on the premise that women are under-represented in their field because of systemic sexism. And while they enforce policies to favor women (and, incidentally, minorities) in hiring, they still fail to meet their own quotas in either category. In a world ruled by logic, that would mean that their assumptions about sexism and racism are either unfounded, or less relevant to the situation than they believed. Instead of facing that reality, they decided to suppress the voice pointing to where their theory about under-representation, and the curative policies meant to correct the situation, went wrong. Which leads me to believe that Google actually has no will to address the problem of female under-representation, and prefers to stick to the current policy of pretending to denounce what's wrong, continuing to pretend to address the problem, while knowingly (intentionally?) failing miserably.
This kind of deception reminds of the Democrats in general: pretending to represent and fight for the Middle-class while technically sacrificing it for special interests.
10
There's a lot we don't know about the past behavior and performance of Mr. Damore. Based on my experience as a manager of technical staff it strikes me as very possible that there is a history there related to team work, soft skills improvement (required for advancement at even Silicon Valley darlings) among other things. The publication of the manifesto might have been just one more item indicative of a larger management concern.
Then, there is the fact that the science and data employed by Damore was just plain bad. There is nothing more boring than to see 19th C. biology is destiny thinking used as a justification for misogyny and exclusion from professions. I've been in tech for 25+ years and it's my ability to operate under every possible kind of stress that's allowed me to overcome sexual harassment and toxic environments and succeed.
The rhetoric of the alt-right is incendiary, divisive and anti-democratic. Much of it is hate speech. Read the terms and conditions of ISPs and cloud services providers. These businesses are entirely justified in refusing to support the aims of the alt-right.
Then, there is the fact that the science and data employed by Damore was just plain bad. There is nothing more boring than to see 19th C. biology is destiny thinking used as a justification for misogyny and exclusion from professions. I've been in tech for 25+ years and it's my ability to operate under every possible kind of stress that's allowed me to overcome sexual harassment and toxic environments and succeed.
The rhetoric of the alt-right is incendiary, divisive and anti-democratic. Much of it is hate speech. Read the terms and conditions of ISPs and cloud services providers. These businesses are entirely justified in refusing to support the aims of the alt-right.
9
I'm sorry, but this is a serious misrepresentation. There is nothing in the Damore memo that attempts to justify exclusion from professions. He explicitly says that even population level differences in traits and preferences are far less less prominent than the overlap. And he makes it utterly clear that one cannot draw inferences about individuals from population studies. And, finally, I find it astonishing that as a professional you are willing to make judgments about Mr. Damore's possible corrective work history in a national newspaper on the basis of media reports.
9
I am hearing more and more of the lament that the liberal left wants to simply shut out the viewpoints of the conservative right and the more extreme alt-right. Well, let's look at some of the things the liberal left has rejected outright.
Climate change denial. Opposition to same sex marriage. Encouraging homophobia in industries, by denying services based on religious convictions of the business stake holders. Vilification of immigrants. Economic concepts that have no basis in reality or Economic theory.
And most recently, the rather weak arguments by James Damore to support why men are better at tech jobs than women.
I won't even get into the arguments against abortion by the pro-lifers which presumably come directly from their God, and their all-out support for the fetus accompanied by a total lack of support for the new born child.
The reality is that it is difficult to compromise between progressive and regressive ideas - there is no in-between. Thus, liberals have no other option than to fight the so called alt-right and their regressive ideas to the end.
And by the way, do the conservatives and the alt-right ever listen to liberals?
Climate change denial. Opposition to same sex marriage. Encouraging homophobia in industries, by denying services based on religious convictions of the business stake holders. Vilification of immigrants. Economic concepts that have no basis in reality or Economic theory.
And most recently, the rather weak arguments by James Damore to support why men are better at tech jobs than women.
I won't even get into the arguments against abortion by the pro-lifers which presumably come directly from their God, and their all-out support for the fetus accompanied by a total lack of support for the new born child.
The reality is that it is difficult to compromise between progressive and regressive ideas - there is no in-between. Thus, liberals have no other option than to fight the so called alt-right and their regressive ideas to the end.
And by the way, do the conservatives and the alt-right ever listen to liberals?
7
"And most recently, the rather weak arguments by James Damore to support why men are better at tech jobs than women."
It's hard to believe that you could write this if you had actually read the memo.
It's hard to believe that you could write this if you had actually read the memo.
2
@Nathan: Yes, I did read the memo.
1
"I won't even get into the arguments..."
A perfect example of liberal logic. Opposing viewpoints are all so wrong they are not worthy of any consideration at all. And if anyone does dare to consider them, the punishment will be swift and severe.
A perfect example of liberal logic. Opposing viewpoints are all so wrong they are not worthy of any consideration at all. And if anyone does dare to consider them, the punishment will be swift and severe.
5
RE: boycotting the elitist platforms -- Imagine a Youtube or FB without the 4chan trolls and haters. What will all those unemployed, bad boys do while living in their (working) mother's basements. Thanks Paypal, AirBnB and other corporations who have begun to clean up the trash.
5
The operative word in logic board is...
wait for it...
"logic".
wait for it...
"logic".
2
You have no idea what logic is, Son: not really.
If the KKK said, "We are no longer the KKK, we are now the "Alt-JJJ" in an effort to sanitize their name, would The Times start referring to them that way?? Stop capitulating to the white supremacists\racists\white nationalists by using their own doublespeak labels. Call them out for what they are.
3
Again I encourage all thoughtful citizens to actually read the memo as opposed to taking the word of sensationalist media! The memo does not promote "right" wing views, but rather what traditionally used to be considered very centrist logical ones, based on math and science. The only mistake the author made in the memo was implying that his views might be ones of the political right, because he, as most of those his younger age group have been brainwashed by our "liberal" media to believe that any views that do not conform to the political Left's take on an issue are the beliefs of some kind of right wing Nazis. Our media and political establishment have effectively eliminated the political center as a strategy to win policy debates to the detriment of our whole society. To state that males and females have different interests and capabilities in various areas and also are approximately equal in many others is not sexist it is scientifically proved fact supported by observed behavior differences and similarities in many mammalian species. The author's sin was one of heresy against Google's diversity dogma for he said that not only was it discriminatory against men, but probably illegal, and also not likely to work to achieve the diversity that Google claimed as its goal without essentially establishing quasi secret quotas and then hiring based on gender, race etc as opposed to the true qualifications and capabilities of INDIVIDUAL job applicants.
10
I actually read the memo, and he suggests women are biologically less driven to succeed, and less capable of sciences like coding, mathematics and engineering. News flash: There is NO reputable science to back this up. Only prejudice and bias. It is a classically sexist (and likely racist) view circa 1800.
10
Not quite. He is concerned with population level differences in traits and preferences. At that level, men and women have far more in common than not. The divergences are much smaller than the commonality. So you would, on Damore's account, be making a mistaken generalization if you generalized from the divergent few to the many. This is why he strongly denies that you can make any inferences at all about individuals from these small population divergences.
He is trying to say that these population divergences could possibly have an impact on efforts to reach a 50% male/50% female diversity target. So some of his case is speculative. It's also possible that some of the data on specific traits and preferences he uses in his argument are not scientifically well established enough to be reliable. I myself believe that this is to some degree the case, but then I have a low level of confidence in any science of this sort for may reasons, including questionable methodologies and replicability difficulties.
What I find mind boggling here is that Google and many people don't believe that such things can be openly and productively examined and debated. Some are ideologically set against the very idea that men and women might have different traits and preferences or that their brains might differ. I understand the threat of bad science and bad inferences, but the cure is scientific method and open debate. Not the gallows.
He is trying to say that these population divergences could possibly have an impact on efforts to reach a 50% male/50% female diversity target. So some of his case is speculative. It's also possible that some of the data on specific traits and preferences he uses in his argument are not scientifically well established enough to be reliable. I myself believe that this is to some degree the case, but then I have a low level of confidence in any science of this sort for may reasons, including questionable methodologies and replicability difficulties.
What I find mind boggling here is that Google and many people don't believe that such things can be openly and productively examined and debated. Some are ideologically set against the very idea that men and women might have different traits and preferences or that their brains might differ. I understand the threat of bad science and bad inferences, but the cure is scientific method and open debate. Not the gallows.
8
Nathan:
"What I find mind boggling here is that Google and many people don't believe that such things can be openly and productively examined and debated."
******
Precisely. Ironically, Google considers itself a progressive organization because of its tolerance and open-mindedness.
"What I find mind boggling here is that Google and many people don't believe that such things can be openly and productively examined and debated."
******
Precisely. Ironically, Google considers itself a progressive organization because of its tolerance and open-mindedness.
4
Do white males who are benefitting immensely from the way our society is structured REALLY have to go there? It's not enough to have it all, y'all have to have more.
7
Actually, there is a large population of white males in our society who have not been benefitting much at all. A group of them has a soaring death rate. The pitting of blacks and whites against other, men and women against each other, immigrants and natives against each other, almost always masks the difference that causes the most suffering of all: radical inequality and poverty, the rich and the poor. Privilege in its essence is the privilege to avoid avoidable suffering, a privilege many of our people lack, and some lack it radically.
7
Nathan, brilliant comment! Thanks for you thoughtful and intelligent insights. Keep it up!
3
Women are 33% more likely than men to get a college degree now. I can't tell you exactly why that is. But I can tell you that not a single corporation has developed a task force to fix the problem and not a single NGO exists that gives two cents about that problem.
13
Milo is not alt-right. He is of Jewish descent and the alt-right is explicitly opposed to Jewish participation in Western European cultures. You jokers can't call everyone alt-right because they aren't in the center of conservative politics.
10
Not true. Stunning numbers of young Jewish men have thrown in with the neo Nazis of the alt reich. It won't end well.
1
You can do you research but not all women wanted the right to vote (19th Amendment) and not all Slaves wanted their Freedom (13th) and you can look up Association of German National Jews and Der Deutsche Vortrupp..and draw your own conclusions.
So the Jokers at least have Historic Precedent,..what do you have?
So the Jokers at least have Historic Precedent,..what do you have?
2
To refute your argument (which completely doesn't hold any water whatsoever), may I present to you Stephen Miller?
Not just of 'Jewish descent', as you put it, he had a Bar Mitzvah. I know the family, went to high school with his mother. He's as Jewish as it gets. And as alt-right as they come.
Not just of 'Jewish descent', as you put it, he had a Bar Mitzvah. I know the family, went to high school with his mother. He's as Jewish as it gets. And as alt-right as they come.
1
Don't mess with the Alt-Right. There's an awful lot of them out there flying swastikas and rebel flags. They have no problem with causing physical harm to those they don't like.
2
As opposed to the alt left who literally beat up people trying to attend GOP rallies and who literally blocked and threatened conservatives trying to engage in free speech?
10
This argument detracts from the boiled-down reason Mr. Damore was fired. He broadcast a manifesto of sexism decorated as a cri de coeur for "free speech." Mr. Damore has the right to his free speech, but in kind Google has the right to fire him for blatantly stating that women — women like those he is expected to work alongside — are disadvantaged because of inherent, genetic inferiorities.
My guess is that, as a senior engineer, Mr. Damore probably manages staff and projects as a paid employee of Google. He may or may not directly manage women at Google, but it's a fair assumption that he is expected to maintain a productive and respectful working relationship with women.
So here is my question: Does Google benefit from employing a senior-level individual who trumpets such divisive, disparaging and sexist ideology? The answer is pretty simple: No. No they do not.
My guess is that, as a senior engineer, Mr. Damore probably manages staff and projects as a paid employee of Google. He may or may not directly manage women at Google, but it's a fair assumption that he is expected to maintain a productive and respectful working relationship with women.
So here is my question: Does Google benefit from employing a senior-level individual who trumpets such divisive, disparaging and sexist ideology? The answer is pretty simple: No. No they do not.
12
You have either never studied the memo or you have grossly misunderstood it.
"blatantly stating that women — women like those he is expected to work alongside — are disadvantaged because of inherent, genetic inferiorities."
Where is this blatantly stated? Damore makes it clear that he is talking about population level differences, that these differences are dwarfed at the population level by similarities, and that one can never make inferences about individuals based on population studies, especially with such small divergences.
He does speculate that these population level differences could help to explain why Google is having difficulty reaching a 50%male/50% female diversity target.
"blatantly stating that women — women like those he is expected to work alongside — are disadvantaged because of inherent, genetic inferiorities."
Where is this blatantly stated? Damore makes it clear that he is talking about population level differences, that these differences are dwarfed at the population level by similarities, and that one can never make inferences about individuals based on population studies, especially with such small divergences.
He does speculate that these population level differences could help to explain why Google is having difficulty reaching a 50%male/50% female diversity target.
6
Right wing "views" are antithetical to civilized human existence so must be eradicated.
6
So much for freedom of speech. What's next, book burning?
5
You know, I'm sick and tired of the extremists on the right. They are disgraceful people who have no agenda but to foment hate against people who want nothing more than to create a better world for everyone, regardless of race, religion, nation of origin, economic level, sexual orientation and skin color. I know all about the 1st Amendment, but these hateful, disgusting people should be denied the right to spew their hate. They are no better than the Nazis of the 1930s. They, and little donald, sicken me! They deserve no consideration of any kind.
13
In response to Michael Philadelphia
Indeed, Michael. But yours is a hate filled rant also.
Indeed, Michael. But yours is a hate filled rant also.
8
No, its a cry of exhaustion. Normal people dont have hate, but we do get tired of people who center their lives around it. These right wing extremists/ neo nazis have bigger personal problems that wound up manifesting as hate of almost everybody, but theyd be just as draining with another hobby. Toxic people are toxic people.
3
Stop with this phony piety where you think you're some great person who is enlightened because you think you embrace diversity and have the power to determine who can or can not engage in free speech and political debate. As someone who grew up liberal - and still is in many viewpoints - I've come to despise you people on the left for your phoniness and better than though attitude.
7
I love the NYT, read it daily, and applaud the editorial shift after the Trump election to include more content covering the conservative perspective du jour. However, this article, while perhaps accurate in its description of the alt-right response to the Google hubbub, grossly mischaracterizes that response as an extremely conservative viewpoint. It's not. I'm a left-of-center Independent who voted for Obama and Clinton and agree with most points made in the memo. NYT should continue in it's efforts to prevent itself from being it's own ideological echo chamber. This article might have been tabbed under those efforts but by mischaracterizing the response as extremely conservative, achieves just the opposite effect.
13
I'm a left-of-center Independent who voted for Obama and Clinton and agree with most points made in the memo.
Then you are part of the problem Scott. You are just too blind to see it.
Then you are part of the problem Scott. You are just too blind to see it.
3
Voting for the Center/Republican lite candidates doesn't absolve you of your bigger sin of sexism. You need to check yourself.
1
Yes, you can be a leftist liberal and a sexist and even a sexual predator. We had such a president in the 90s if I recall correctly.
2
I agree with the readers below whose opinion is that Mr. Damore should not have been terminated by Google. Mr. Damore stated his opinions in an open forum. Google should have used this to engage the larger community within and outside for more discussions on the topic. Tech companies NEED more women and minorities. No doubt about it. I have worked in Silicon Valley for about 30 years as an Indian immigrant in Sales jobs. Usually I was the only woman in meetings - internal or customer. Its not very different even now. Women are smart and may do/approach things differently than men. Companies need both genders represented equally in all departments and leadership levels. Same applies to all ethnicities as well to get the best ideas and be innovative. Google may have lost an opportunity for a good, open discussion with all ideas aired out.
8
He violated Google HR code of ethics policies for disparaging people based on gender - a code of ethics he agreed to abide to in accepting a job at Google. I work in investment banking and we also have those policies and are required to abide by them as a condition of our employment. If anyone, man or woman, derided anyone in the way he did, that person would be fired immediately.
There is no "opportunity for a good, open discussion with all ideas aired out" - we've already had those discussions over the last 200 years, particularly when women had to fight to get the right to vote and sundry other rights that some (particularly white) men appear to feel is their birthright.
Yes, tech companies need more women and minorities, but are you clueless enough to believe that tolerating this sort of behavior is going to encourage them to join??
There is no "opportunity for a good, open discussion with all ideas aired out" - we've already had those discussions over the last 200 years, particularly when women had to fight to get the right to vote and sundry other rights that some (particularly white) men appear to feel is their birthright.
Yes, tech companies need more women and minorities, but are you clueless enough to believe that tolerating this sort of behavior is going to encourage them to join??
9
Where in the memo did he belittle or deprecate
people based on gender?
I cannot believe that you have actually read the document.
people based on gender?
I cannot believe that you have actually read the document.
8
He technically violated googles code of ethics but the point of his memo isn't necessarily sexist. There are reasons why women don't care to go into programming and IT. It is totally OK if most women don't want to do it. We don't need a police force to assign an equilibrium to balance it out. We really don't. It also reeks of hypocrisy when in this year women are 33% more likely than men to go to college. Nobody at Google or anywhere else in silicon valley or any NGO gives two cents about that problem. Would that also not be sexism?
3
The suggestion that those who agree with Damore's memo/oppose his firing are all "alt-right" is ludicrous. According to a corporate survey conducted on Tuesday and Wednesday, 56% of Google's employees said they didn't think it was right for the company to fire Damore, and he had significant support among all the corporations represented in the survey. Last time I checked, Google was not a bastion of the alt-right. Consider the possibility that progressivism is overreaching badly here and elsewhere in the form of intolerance of reasonable, fact-based arguments that don't submit to its agenda - and people across the board are tired of it.
14
Nice try at diversion from the subject unxer discussion. But I don't think it will carry much weight.
3
In response to Joe New York
I totally agree with you.
I totally agree with you.
4
So there are a lot bigots and misogynists at Google. What is your point other than employing a logic fallacy and looking like a know-nothing?
2
It is a paradox that in a liberal, tolerant culture, the only thing that can't be tolerated is intolerance. Right wing cultural ideas are premised on intolerance of many things: sexual equality, homosexuality, atheism, racial mixing, secular government, Islam, non-Christian religions, lifestyles that deviate from the Ozzie and Harriet view of the family, just to name a few. Why would any broad-minded organization promote tolerance of these intolerant ideas? These ideas are pernicious, and should be anathema everywhere. If tolerating right-wing ideas means putting with this nonsense, then let's hear it for liberal intolerance.
8
It is important to stop calling these interlopers in our government "alt-rt." They are truly old style WWII fascists and we should call them by their correct name. Why should we be shy about the truth?
8
Thanks.
2
If we call them Nazis, people get hysterical. Call them Klan, people get hysterical. Alt Reich works pretty well, until somebody gets all undone about it. So, alt right it is. We know it means hate filled neo Nazis neo Klan. Which are the same thing.
I grew up liberal and I used to laugh when people would make the claim that the nazis were liberals or leftists. It's obviously not true. HOWEVER. The same tactics that the nazis used can be used by anyone regardless of political affiliation. And in the past 12 months we've seen liberals literally riot in the streets after an open and free election, literally threaten members of the electoral college to not vote who there states constituents voted for. Who literally assaulted and intimidated people trying to attend GOP rallies. I saw NONE of that on the right. I saw no riots when Obama won (who I voted for by the way) But while Trump may be an awful person in many ways, the liberal response to him has been absolutely disgusting and horrifying.
6
The misunderstanding of math here is staggering. I guess Damore has illustrated the dangers of making a mathematical argument no matter how valid it is.
8
Nonsense. Damore has not made a valid mathematical argument.
Here's a math problem for you. 10% of all horses are gray. What is the probability that a gray horse will win the 2017 Kentucky Derby?
If you say "10%," then you are wrong. You cannot assume that the distribution of traits in a specialized subgroup is the same as the distribution of traits in the general population. The fact that 10% of all horses are gray is irrelevant, because only Thoroughbred horses can enter the Kentucky Derby, and only 3% of Thoroughbred horses are gray.
Damore, who has a background in biology, should have understood that the distribution of traits in the general population cannot be used to predict traits in a specialized subgroup. Google and other tech companies aren't recruiting women from the general population, but from women who have demonstrated strong technical skills. But all of Damore's assertions are drawn from average behaviors in the general population of women, even when he is specifically discussing the careers of technical women at Google.
Here's a math problem for you. 10% of all horses are gray. What is the probability that a gray horse will win the 2017 Kentucky Derby?
If you say "10%," then you are wrong. You cannot assume that the distribution of traits in a specialized subgroup is the same as the distribution of traits in the general population. The fact that 10% of all horses are gray is irrelevant, because only Thoroughbred horses can enter the Kentucky Derby, and only 3% of Thoroughbred horses are gray.
Damore, who has a background in biology, should have understood that the distribution of traits in the general population cannot be used to predict traits in a specialized subgroup. Google and other tech companies aren't recruiting women from the general population, but from women who have demonstrated strong technical skills. But all of Damore's assertions are drawn from average behaviors in the general population of women, even when he is specifically discussing the careers of technical women at Google.
3
This is reasonable. But the question Damore is trying to answer is the question of whether a 50% male/50% female diversity target is reasonably achievable. The case he is making is that population level differences between males and females might be a factor in Google's failure to make good headway toward that goal.
The way you would prefer for him to succeed would decide the case even more strongly against the 50/50 target, since Google software engineers are recruited from people with degrees in that area, and that pool is nowhere near 50/50.
The way you would prefer for him to succeed would decide the case even more strongly against the 50/50 target, since Google software engineers are recruited from people with degrees in that area, and that pool is nowhere near 50/50.
4
He obviously made some bad judgements in some of what he wrote. But here's some more math. In 2017 33% of women are more likely to get a college degree than men. So is that not a problem? Nobody gives two cents about this even though we've clearly seen the wages of women rising much more quickly than men in the past decade and we saw generally speaking men suffer far worse after the 2008 economic collapse. There is no one at google or any corporation setting up a task force to help balance this out. There is no NGO that gives two cents about this. But if men were 33% more likely to go to college than women it is beyond question that people would have their panties in a bunch about it all. Non profits would be going gangbusters about getting more women into college.
1
the majority of the comments seem to deride the alt-right growth. however, the alt-left movement is no joke either. we've seen that agenda pushed across Europe (how's that working out now?) and across the USA for the past 8 years. it is this alt-left agenda that has created the growth of the alt-right movement. extremism grows when compromise disappears. when one pushes an agenda with no room for compromise with the other sides differing opinion, then the only logical response is extremism in the other direction. that feeling of moral self-righteousness that you think gives you the high ground to push an agenda to its absolute limits is what gives birth to the alt-opposite opinion.
11
TRANSLATION OF YOUR REMARKS: "Once again, the liberals are entirely to blame!"
How does your dubious claim account for the absolute intransigence and filibustering of the Republicans and their constant, vicious and often personal attacks on President Obama and his family?
How does your dubious claim account for the absolute intransigence and filibustering of the Republicans and their constant, vicious and often personal attacks on President Obama and his family?
3
a little paranoid, steve? the gist of my comment was, any group pushing through legislation to its absolute limit, without any concern for the other sides opinions, is going to create anger and create growth for an alt-opposition movement. Doesn't matter which group is doing the pushing and which group is being pushed. yes, liberals did the pushing for 8 years and created goth for the alt-right movement. now that group is pushing the liberals and the liberals are growing an alt-left attitude. my comment was generally neutral as to politics, your paranoia is obvious.
4
feelings are overrated. toughen up america.
4
If that is the state of one of our "best" technology company's employees, our competitors have nothing to fear.
2
Any form of "harassment" is illegal in the workplace, clarified in a variety of ways by HR departments. Talking about (or acting out) politics, religion, or sex in any type of inappropriate way (implied pressure from peers or management) is subject to charges of harassment. Group prayer, cult-like group therapy disguised as team building, inappropriate demonstrations of nationalism, pressure to visit strip clubs on business trips, or my manager requesting long uncomfortable hugs can all be immediately challenged.
I think it's sort of funny that the most pathetic millennial whiners are of the alt-right. Poor babies.
I think it's sort of funny that the most pathetic millennial whiners are of the alt-right. Poor babies.
5
This should be productive. It will address many of the very real problems we have a society, while getting everyone even more outraged and incensed than they already are.
3
"Right-wing [...] cliques", "pro-Trump types" (oh, go ahead, we all know you wanted to say "the deplorables"), "far-right activists", "aggressive political campaign", "alt-right provocateur"... Ms Southern (the young woman who got a bottle of something poured over her head as she was engaged in a debate, right?) can have her account closed because her actions are “likely to cause loss of life,” but not those who e.g. perform abortions? So corporations are free to fire, ban and restrict whoever their like - as a commenter here stated, and so does the article (mentioning e.g. YouTube restricting content - and what exactly constitutes “controversial religious"? Who decides?). "It’s a tech company’s right, of course, to bar whomever it wishes." "Of course"? Why? Because "tech companies almost always have terms in the fine print that give them the right to cut off access to users for any reason." So all those Christian small businesses would not have been sued out of existence had they put into their terms of service fine print saying they have the right not to provide their services for any reason, right? And Brietbart isn't conservative. It's neo-con. Two different things, entirely.
3
Everyone has their viewpoint.
I would have brought the issues to internal first.
The author might have done this indirectly or presented the issues in a way that Google did not see an issue?
I am glad the document went public & was happy to read responses from women @ Google that verified the "tech-bro culture" does exist.
Yes, both sides need to be heard & addressed,
I work with introvert & extrovert MALES & FEMALES - this to me doesl not effect ones ability to do a job.
Sales or front end people do have a tendency and are required to have extrovert characteristics. Where "back end" employees do not need to "sell themselves" as part of their job.
I do not see the GENDER connection in the author's argument.
I do feel that some women, when they are young, are still in the "high school" habit of acting out the BFF or submissive or running for Miss Congeniality persona in both work & personal relationships.
If Google would look beyond 20 or 30 age ceiling and give women over that age group an audience they will find women with tech skill sets and personalities that are able to work in Teams or on their own.
**The work place should be about skill sets, experience and ability to fit in as a Team player or on their own.
**The work place should not be about race, gender, sex (yes, sex & gender are 2 different attributes) clothing size, appearance, submissive or ability to make the male workers feel like "men".
I would have brought the issues to internal first.
The author might have done this indirectly or presented the issues in a way that Google did not see an issue?
I am glad the document went public & was happy to read responses from women @ Google that verified the "tech-bro culture" does exist.
Yes, both sides need to be heard & addressed,
I work with introvert & extrovert MALES & FEMALES - this to me doesl not effect ones ability to do a job.
Sales or front end people do have a tendency and are required to have extrovert characteristics. Where "back end" employees do not need to "sell themselves" as part of their job.
I do not see the GENDER connection in the author's argument.
I do feel that some women, when they are young, are still in the "high school" habit of acting out the BFF or submissive or running for Miss Congeniality persona in both work & personal relationships.
If Google would look beyond 20 or 30 age ceiling and give women over that age group an audience they will find women with tech skill sets and personalities that are able to work in Teams or on their own.
**The work place should be about skill sets, experience and ability to fit in as a Team player or on their own.
**The work place should not be about race, gender, sex (yes, sex & gender are 2 different attributes) clothing size, appearance, submissive or ability to make the male workers feel like "men".
1
It is disappointing that NYT has taken to writing about 'Alt-Right'. It is not as if it is a registered society with members that have uniform view of a lot of issues. I wish they were more accurate in their headline and not pass labels on people like this. Now, everyone who agrees with the google engineer on the one issue of diversity in a company is going to be viewed as an 'Alt-right' person.
8
If the roles were reversed, the alt-right would claim that they have the right to say or do whatever they want within the confines of a privately owned business without being monitored by the politically correct nanny state. Those people sure enjoy whining and being victims.
8
I entered the internet as an 18 year old in 2000.
No social media, frequentely un-moderated chat boards. The game's were ugly and involved and people were often cruel and brutal to each other.
The present movement is a backlash to the current political climate online a bit of nostalgia for the bad old days of the internet.
No social media, frequentely un-moderated chat boards. The game's were ugly and involved and people were often cruel and brutal to each other.
The present movement is a backlash to the current political climate online a bit of nostalgia for the bad old days of the internet.
1
So since most large US corporations are conservative in their nature and behaviors...whats wrong with a few being liberal?
While Im not 100% onboard with the firing, and I wonder if it was solely over this issue, and not an accumulation, and this was the last straw, there are other companies like Hobby Lobby, Chic afil (sp?) that we know are of a certain political allegiance, as well as heavily xtian in their outlook...so why cant Google, etc be more liberal/progressive, etc?
If Corps are people now, people have the right to decide who they interact with, and this case employ.
The more the Alt-right tries these tactics the more they look like those they vilify.
While Im not 100% onboard with the firing, and I wonder if it was solely over this issue, and not an accumulation, and this was the last straw, there are other companies like Hobby Lobby, Chic afil (sp?) that we know are of a certain political allegiance, as well as heavily xtian in their outlook...so why cant Google, etc be more liberal/progressive, etc?
If Corps are people now, people have the right to decide who they interact with, and this case employ.
The more the Alt-right tries these tactics the more they look like those they vilify.
1
Right-wingers mis-represent free speech protections, and sadly, unsophisticated journalists are easy prey for this sleight of hand.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights mapped the path out of protecting those who advocate the oppression of others:
Article 30. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
Article 30 makes it clear there's no free speech protection for those who advocate child molestation or workplace discrimination. Post-war Germany understood this when it outlawed advocacy of Nazi-ism. The ACLU and the press could learn a few things in this regard.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights mapped the path out of protecting those who advocate the oppression of others:
Article 30. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
Article 30 makes it clear there's no free speech protection for those who advocate child molestation or workplace discrimination. Post-war Germany understood this when it outlawed advocacy of Nazi-ism. The ACLU and the press could learn a few things in this regard.
2
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not legal authority in the U.S.
The First Amendment to the Constitution only offers us protection from censorship by the federal government. At work, we need to follow corporate policy and for the most part, the US Constitution does not give us free-speech rights at work. And, mostly, corporate policy does not either. At work, we mostly have to keep the boss happy and if we don't, we can be fired.
The First Amendment to the Constitution only offers us protection from censorship by the federal government. At work, we need to follow corporate policy and for the most part, the US Constitution does not give us free-speech rights at work. And, mostly, corporate policy does not either. At work, we mostly have to keep the boss happy and if we don't, we can be fired.
3
That our understanding of the US Constitution does not deal with the linguistic paradox of the First Amendment is exactly the dilemna I'm calling out.
I believe that Bertrand Russell provided the logical framework for resolving the linguistic paradox long after the Constitution was adopted.
As for the legal power of employers to silence workers, this is indeed well established. But I'd prefer that power be restrained to better protect whistleblowers and those who've suffered actual harm from discrimination.
I believe that Bertrand Russell provided the logical framework for resolving the linguistic paradox long after the Constitution was adopted.
As for the legal power of employers to silence workers, this is indeed well established. But I'd prefer that power be restrained to better protect whistleblowers and those who've suffered actual harm from discrimination.
2
The so-called alt-right is the KKK of 2017; they have more power than they actually represent in the general population. They should be banned in a society that promotes diversity; they are fascists at heart, and also sexist and racist. Like the KKK they are living in the way past. Many are dangerous. My prediction is that they will end up using violence, and will be shot or jailed eventually. Sooner than later, I hope :)
2
There were a few minor offensive things in Damore's thing, but also a lot of really good points (I actually read it). Overall, it was not offensive to my socially liberal self. While Google is a private company and can do what it wants, it's messed up he got fired.
Why is the NYT now connecting him with the Alt Right? It must be an intentional effort by NYT to pander the the left. It's part of the same problem with the extreme left where if I say "there are differences between men and women" I get called a misogynist white supremacist.
Geeze.
Why is the NYT now connecting him with the Alt Right? It must be an intentional effort by NYT to pander the the left. It's part of the same problem with the extreme left where if I say "there are differences between men and women" I get called a misogynist white supremacist.
Geeze.
11
Nice Strawman there Pal.
OF COURSE there are differences between women and men (and the other genetic genders). The PROBLEM is that some use these differences to make conclusions. THAT is the problem. Nice attempt at distraction.
OF COURSE there are differences between women and men (and the other genetic genders). The PROBLEM is that some use these differences to make conclusions. THAT is the problem. Nice attempt at distraction.
1
My company, as well as many others, have handbooks and employee agreements outlining which behaviors are acceptable in the workplace. (Our handbook goes as far as requiring good personal hygiene.) A company in my state can fire anyone at will who breaks the rules of these agreements which they sign. This guy did not just express a conservative view like "I think that affirmative action is reverse discrimination". He used supposed science to basically call into question the abilities of women in technology. That would be akin to my saying something like "Men have more testosterone than women so they think about sex more often so they don't concentrate as well as women because they are constantly thinking about sex so they aren't good at detailed tasks. Therefore men should only work on big picture tasks." Sounds pretty ridiculous and hostile doesn't it? For the record I am a female software engineer who is very good at her job who works great with my mostly male colleagues. I do not like "pair programming" as Damore assumes women do and I'm also not neurotic or afraid to express my opinion. In fact more men at my company are high strung and like pair programming. Damore was not fired for his conservative (i.e sexist) views, he was fired for being dumb enough to break one of the rules of his employee agreement by creating a hostile work environment.
9
Your hypothetical train of thought on the men testosterone thing is not offensive and could be subject to investigation (science) except for the concluding sentence which is a major leap, a binary rather than a distribution, and misrepresentative of the fired Google employee's memo.
2
Well thanks google and the others. Don't let those alt-rt ( actually they are fascists) push you around. Hang on to Democracy!
"...parallel right-wing internet where all speech is allowed, no matter how noxious or incendiary."
I can guarantee that not all speech is allowed on those sites. Any talk on behalf of feminism, BLM, the rights of non-whites, etc. will quickly evolve into a campaign of intimidation, harassment, and doxing, at the very least.
I can guarantee that not all speech is allowed on those sites. Any talk on behalf of feminism, BLM, the rights of non-whites, etc. will quickly evolve into a campaign of intimidation, harassment, and doxing, at the very least.
3
Silicon Valley is moving further to the right, or at least further towards the Ayn Rand version of the right. Since I'm a political theorist it seemed wise to familiarize myself with Rand's two most popular books (TF and AS), even though I know the fundamental premise of her "theory'" is intellectually bankrupt (a la Nozkick). Many wasted hours later I finally gleened Rand's appeal: she tells privileged white men what they most want to hear: whatever they accomplish, they did it on their own; charity is a virtue of the weak, while real virtue is greed; you should feel good about cheating others, for that demonstrates your intellectual prowess. (Never mind that the virtues Rand criticizes are the Christian virtues, which is doubly interesting if you consider which politicians are most devoted to her work.)
Moreover, Rand constantly makes her female characters subservient to individualistic males, which, of course, is exactly what the libertarian, men's-rights egoist wants to believe. Many of the male tech elite ('male' is redundant, I know) are also the ideal-type for: nerd, and Rand's work makes it clear that the tall, gangly, industrialist should be highly sought after by the opposite sex. No wonder her readers believe her fiction is actually some highly evolved Truth.
The alt-right may mistakenly think that Silicon Valley is their enemy, perhaps because the valley is in a deep blue state; however, the frightening reality is that it's filled with like-minded males.
Moreover, Rand constantly makes her female characters subservient to individualistic males, which, of course, is exactly what the libertarian, men's-rights egoist wants to believe. Many of the male tech elite ('male' is redundant, I know) are also the ideal-type for: nerd, and Rand's work makes it clear that the tall, gangly, industrialist should be highly sought after by the opposite sex. No wonder her readers believe her fiction is actually some highly evolved Truth.
The alt-right may mistakenly think that Silicon Valley is their enemy, perhaps because the valley is in a deep blue state; however, the frightening reality is that it's filled with like-minded males.
2
A central character in AS is a female who is a hero. Much of her heroism involves standing up against men with true privilege who wish to suppress the creators and disruptors.
the alt-right needs to get their house in order before they come for anyone else
1
Alt-right sites as the bastions of free speech? Have they looked at the sites on-line these days?
2
It's a free country. The alt right is welcome to decamp en masse and form either own internet echo chamber of horrors, were they can be free to form their conspiracy based existences. The Borg won't be a mass enslaved consciousness, more likely it will resemble collective lunacy of the alt right. Go! My inbox will thank you for it.
I'm sorry, it seems the alt-right has issue with corporations exercising their deeply held beliefs. Hmm...that really is too bad. I wonder how a case like that would do in the Supreme Court? Is there any precedent for this kind of thing?
2
Anyone who uses a social networking site signs on to an agreement which specifies when and how an account can be terminated. I would find it hard to believe that the companies do not also require similar agreements when employment is offered and accepted. Therefore, account terminations and firings are covered under a contract to which the user or employee is a party.
I don't have any problems with a networking site terminating an account or a corporation firing an employee when the account or person has violated the contract. Anyone who fails to read the contract proceeds at their own risk.
I don't have any problems with a networking site terminating an account or a corporation firing an employee when the account or person has violated the contract. Anyone who fails to read the contract proceeds at their own risk.
Obviously the alt-rights would only be satisfied in the Internet was biased in their direction. The notion that a public forum is open to all shades of opinion is foreign to them.
1
the only reason to talk about these white supremacists is to organize against them, the right to free speech goes both ways, use it against them as well as non-violent resistance and constant vigilance, this atavistic eruption/recrudescence is amongst the worst of problems in any vaguely working society
1
Since when is treating women as creative, intelligent, valuable people a "liberal bias"?
10
Commenter nom de guerre made two excellent points earlier. S/he said,
"Stop worshiping at the tech altar. The people running most of these companies care only about earning obscene incomes, not about contributing to society in any real constructive way or saving the environment or you.
As for white nationalists, they only care about being "fair" if it benefits them."
Well said. While some tech inventors/entrepreneurs may have had the best of intentions (in addition to making a profit) and initially envisioned their tools as a way to democratize the citizenry, the obvious downside is the incredible platform tech has provided to mega-large entities, such as corporations. Free parking at the mall decimated Main Street shopping. Internet commerce will decimate what is left of the few true mom-and-pop enterprises still in existence and bolster the enormity of big box commerce, such as Walmart, Home Depot, you name it. These ultra-large businesses could not manage the far reaches of their kingdoms (remember the Roman Empire?) without the data, inventory control, supply chain and transport management, and labor control tech globally provides them.
I get the feeling Mr. Zuckerberg of Facebook regrets the unintended consequences of his platform. I’m not sure what he can do about it, though. Having made gobs of dough, or having married into money, or descended from it, does not automatically make you an omniscient godhead, all-wise, with all the answers. (See Betsy DeVos.)
Now what?
"Stop worshiping at the tech altar. The people running most of these companies care only about earning obscene incomes, not about contributing to society in any real constructive way or saving the environment or you.
As for white nationalists, they only care about being "fair" if it benefits them."
Well said. While some tech inventors/entrepreneurs may have had the best of intentions (in addition to making a profit) and initially envisioned their tools as a way to democratize the citizenry, the obvious downside is the incredible platform tech has provided to mega-large entities, such as corporations. Free parking at the mall decimated Main Street shopping. Internet commerce will decimate what is left of the few true mom-and-pop enterprises still in existence and bolster the enormity of big box commerce, such as Walmart, Home Depot, you name it. These ultra-large businesses could not manage the far reaches of their kingdoms (remember the Roman Empire?) without the data, inventory control, supply chain and transport management, and labor control tech globally provides them.
I get the feeling Mr. Zuckerberg of Facebook regrets the unintended consequences of his platform. I’m not sure what he can do about it, though. Having made gobs of dough, or having married into money, or descended from it, does not automatically make you an omniscient godhead, all-wise, with all the answers. (See Betsy DeVos.)
Now what?
3
Wow. Just crawl in a hole and avoid modernity.
But...if corporations are people, then they've got that First Amendment thing going on.
3
The Alt-Right is always defending "Freedom and Capitalism" and the "competitive" market place as the solution for everything. Now maybe their little brains are realizing that when big corporations control things... gone is "competition" and freedom... the mega corporations choose. If they don't like something... they kill it. If they see the Alt-Right as un ugly bug causing them problems... squish. I'm not a fan of the corporatization of American or the world. Nor am I a fan of a US Government awash in dollars protecting Corporate interests over the interests of the people.... but if the Republican party wants corporate dollars (and that is what the party lives for) the Alt Right will have to accept that those same corporations may not like the Alt Right meddling in their businesses.
1
Damore misrepresented his training, claiming on public media to have a Ph.D. from Harvard, when that was a lie. This 28-year-old twit spewed misogynistic clap-trap on a company site. Google has no reason to retain such a person. His presence is toxic in the company, and it is certainly not illegal for him to be fired. Let the alt-Right hire him. He will certainly have job offers from other rich bigots.
Trump's war on "political correctness" is just a dog-whistle to haters legitimizing their nativism, xenophobia, misogyny, racism, homophobia and Islamophobia. They now think that because the President does it, it is now acceptable behavior. It is not. Bravo to Google for standing up for decency and respect for ALL Americans.
Trump's war on "political correctness" is just a dog-whistle to haters legitimizing their nativism, xenophobia, misogyny, racism, homophobia and Islamophobia. They now think that because the President does it, it is now acceptable behavior. It is not. Bravo to Google for standing up for decency and respect for ALL Americans.
8
Please provide the link (s) to where he misstated his educational credentials.
3
Everywhere one looks in nature there are probability distributions, if one measures the height of a large sample of men you would find a probability distribution that is normal. Taking the same measurement of women one would similarly find a normal distribution function. Comparing the two distributions of height one would find that the peak of the men's function would be a little to the right of women. That is not being sexist it is just fact.
It is not unreasonable nor is it sexist to hypothesize that similar differences would exist in other traits.
This is why the hypothesize (everyone is essentially equal in their traits) of "progressive" thought is not based in reality.
It is not unreasonable nor is it sexist to hypothesize that similar differences would exist in other traits.
This is why the hypothesize (everyone is essentially equal in their traits) of "progressive" thought is not based in reality.
3
He states multiple times that women are stress-averse, and takes it as a matter of course that stressful jobs pay more. If we accept his premise, why privilege stress over, for instance, necessary jobs that are repetitive and mind-numbingly tedious? Is there something inherently more valuable about being stressed than being detail-oriented, or is it that the stressful jobs are where the men are, therefore they pay more?
If you accept that men are like X and women are like Y, it's still a jump to say that this means men will naturally have the high-status, high-paying jobs.
If you accept that men are like X and women are like Y, it's still a jump to say that this means men will naturally have the high-status, high-paying jobs.
The first part of your comment is correct - there likely are group mean differences between distribution curves of men and women on a number of biological parameters. Some where women "outperform" men on average and vice versa.
The problem comes when you try to apply that very simplistic basic science data to an unimaginably complex issue like human behavior and work performance, which depend on literally thousands of individual parameters, integrated and working in concert.
The other scientific problems with your logic and comment are that: inter-gender differences in many of these parameters tend to be extremely small and the distribution curves typically overlap significantly - i.e. inter-gender differences (women vs men) are much much smaller than intra-gender differences (men vs men), and hence subtle biological differences along cannot possibly account for the very striking male-female hiring imbalances apparent at Google and elsewhere (let alone explain pay differences).
The other part you got completely wrong was your last sentence. Progressives don't believe everyone is equal in their biological traits; progressives believe that everyone should be treated with equal value by society regardless of what their biological traits are. You know "content of character" not "color of their skin" sort of thing
The problem comes when you try to apply that very simplistic basic science data to an unimaginably complex issue like human behavior and work performance, which depend on literally thousands of individual parameters, integrated and working in concert.
The other scientific problems with your logic and comment are that: inter-gender differences in many of these parameters tend to be extremely small and the distribution curves typically overlap significantly - i.e. inter-gender differences (women vs men) are much much smaller than intra-gender differences (men vs men), and hence subtle biological differences along cannot possibly account for the very striking male-female hiring imbalances apparent at Google and elsewhere (let alone explain pay differences).
The other part you got completely wrong was your last sentence. Progressives don't believe everyone is equal in their biological traits; progressives believe that everyone should be treated with equal value by society regardless of what their biological traits are. You know "content of character" not "color of their skin" sort of thing
It is not unreasonable nor is it sexist to hypothesize that similar differences would exist in other traits.
But what IS sexist is making unfair decisions predicated upon these differences.
But what IS sexist is making unfair decisions predicated upon these differences.
1
James Damore's 10 page rant was ill conceived. The points were too subjective. He wants to believe that what he says are fundamental truths that need to be said. He is wrong. He shows no empathy towards other life journeys to becoming a "software engineer". That job title is not a private club. He has his own life story; that is fine. He has his own thoughts; that is fine. Where he went wrong is making the erroneous (ill)logical jump to assume that what he feels, what he perceives are an elemental part of working as a software engineer at Google.
Google pays XY chromozone employees according to their ability to write and support software. They pay their XX chromozone employees less than their XY employees. There are current legal proceedings over this on going now. If Mr. Damore really believes what he writes, he doesn't want to work at Google, and Google does not need him working for them.
Google pays XY chromozone employees according to their ability to write and support software. They pay their XX chromozone employees less than their XY employees. There are current legal proceedings over this on going now. If Mr. Damore really believes what he writes, he doesn't want to work at Google, and Google does not need him working for them.
3
I've lived in the belly of the beast (Palo Alto) for 60 years; grew up here. Good luck, "alt-right" preeners and complainers. You'll never even dent the Goliath that is Silicon Valley. So enjoy your echo chamber gatherings full of rightie tisk-tiskers. This is just the same old, same old from the right wing squealers with their hurt "widdle" feelings. And all the while the 21st century is quiet content to move forward without you.
4
wow, that describes the left to a tee. hurt "widdle" feelings! and which side pioneered that? who needed "safe places" and crayons and coloring books on November 9th?
3
Conspicuously missing from this article is the fact that mainstream conservatives have also condemned Google's PC overreaction. That omission effectively equate criticism of Google with the excesses and other inanities of the alt-Right. That's dishonest.
5
The column draws the wrong conclusions. The idea of free speech is that by allowing even irrational or hateful speech that rational ideas will be shown to win out. Corporations like Facebook and Google are so ubiquitous that they have become virtual monopolies. I would hope that they feel a lot of responsibility to allow all viewpoints to be heard on their systems. Like media in the distant past, no one should know their viewpoint when they use their products. Let their liberal ideas and viewpoints come out in the private actions of the executives not in the corporate settings.
5
The right has relentlessly fought for race segregation. It's time for the LEFT to fight for cultural segregation. We need to preserve leftist innovations (GPS, transplant surgery, symphony orchestras, telecommunications, vaccines, English etc) for leftists only.
Let the right start their own civilization.
That should give us all a good laugh.
Let the right start their own civilization.
That should give us all a good laugh.
4
Bizarre. GPS is "leftist"?
1
What made ME laugh was your list of supposed "Leftist innovations"; not only because I fail to see how you can attribute any of these to a Leftist individual; but because Leftist crazies as we unfortunately know them today have little in common with Left leaning individuals from the past. Maybe Stalin and Pol Pot, what with their intolerance for dissent; but then again they weren't really the definition of innovation.
2
The entire scientific community is leftist. Without relativity, GPS would not work and Einstein was an unapologetic leftist, just like every great scientist. Hawking is a far leftist. There are no Republican scientists, (composers, writers, etc) because they are not creative people. Period.
2
Sorry, but Google operates in the Bay Area and the employees are very diverse and very smart. What possible appeal can the ulterior right have for them?
2
There is no inherent right to freedom of expression in the workplace or on any particular internet portal. Speech in these environments and using these network media is restricted by the policies of the companies and media owners. I would suspect that this same basic principle holds on private college campuses. Hate based groups such as alt.right are free within the limits of the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent to create their own portals with different policies more to their liking. Reddit already seems to be rife with their ilk. As for James Damore, his narcissistic ego, styled as it is in the image of Peter Thiel, will not be missed.
7
So the Democratic Party is ready to jettison Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the Supreme Court, in defense of what? Speech codes and "diversity"?
3
You Republicans couldn't even get rid of the ACA with 7 years to work on it and all three branches handed to you through a broken system. Tell me, how do you think Republicans, even if they stay in power, are going to get rid of much more deeply entrenched social safety net programs?
And what do you mean with the scare quotes around diversity? Or are you like Trump, you don't know when it is appropriate to use quotation marks?
And what do you mean with the scare quotes around diversity? Or are you like Trump, you don't know when it is appropriate to use quotation marks?
6
What does this article have to do with the Democratic Party? Just because one is not a right wing, breitbart ,info tool,doesn't make them a democrat.
1
Please, please, stop calling them the "alt-right." They are Nazis. Bigots. Period.
9
My thoughts exactly. I would add "white supremacists" to your list. I'm tired of the media conforming to the white supremacists' "white-washed", kinder, gentler version of themselves. Call them what they are. Please, NYT, don't play their game of rebranding.
2
Mr. Roose: Did you read Damore's memo? You characterize it as disagreeing with Google's "progressive" values, but his memo is a critique of Google's methods, not of its values. In fact, he clearly and repeated affirms those values. It's a debate about means, not ends. Yet that distinction seems completely lost amidst the knee-jerk spasming on both sides of the issue.
I am deeply disappointed that you equate disagreement with Google's firing decision with extreme alt-right elements and Trumpism, leaving no middle ground for leftist progressives, such as myself, who believe fervently in the causes of equality and social progress, but might disagree with how those ends ought to be pursued. Personally, I find the decision to fire Damore grievously unfortunate -- by suppressing discussion of how best to achieve equality, it actually sets us back.
In particular, I find it deeply disconcerting that you, and many others, appear completely uninterested in actual empirical research on sex differences.
Why is it that ignoring science in the service of denying climate change is abhorrent, but it's just fine to ignore science in the service of a social agenda? The fact is that articles like yours -- which serve only to hyperpolarize the issues by refusing to engage empirical research -- make meaningful discourse and problem-solving virtually impossible.
I am deeply disappointed that you equate disagreement with Google's firing decision with extreme alt-right elements and Trumpism, leaving no middle ground for leftist progressives, such as myself, who believe fervently in the causes of equality and social progress, but might disagree with how those ends ought to be pursued. Personally, I find the decision to fire Damore grievously unfortunate -- by suppressing discussion of how best to achieve equality, it actually sets us back.
In particular, I find it deeply disconcerting that you, and many others, appear completely uninterested in actual empirical research on sex differences.
Why is it that ignoring science in the service of denying climate change is abhorrent, but it's just fine to ignore science in the service of a social agenda? The fact is that articles like yours -- which serve only to hyperpolarize the issues by refusing to engage empirical research -- make meaningful discourse and problem-solving virtually impossible.
9
CERN has their first female director, the incredible physicist Fabiola Gianotti, while the Times reports the untimely death of Maryam Mirzakhani—winner of the Fields Medal in mathematics— at the young age of 40. Other cases abound whereas Republican achievement in ANY branch of science is ZERO. It makes no sense to make disparaging statements about the intellectual abilities of women in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, while it makes perfect sense to restrict Republicans to ditch digging and highway cleanup because they have NO creative ability and exist purely as a destructive force in our society.
4
I strongly agree with this post. This discussion is destructively polarized. Conflating a defense of Damore with alt-right positions is just wrong, inaccurate, and helps to destroy the middle ground on which agreements and understanding might be reached. The comments here are more full of ad hominems and name calling and a lack of reasoning than I can remember with other recent articles. People seem to take extreme positions on Damore without having carefully read his memo. There were some edited versions that were easier to misunderstand but the complete memo is now readily available. This comment by T. Brown summarizes its positions accurately. Let's separate the alt-right category (a category I have tried but failed to understand) from the Damore case. The issues here are too important for this to generate only a shouting match. I know it sounds a little grand, but in this case I believe it to be true: Both reason and liberty are at stake here.
4
The idea that men are valued by status and are therefore forced to go to the high-stress and high-danger (and high-paying) jobs is straight out of the manosphere.
None of his ideas are new. All of them have been around for a while, used to explain to us women that if we want to be paid like men and promoted like men we are asking too much.
None of his ideas are new. All of them have been around for a while, used to explain to us women that if we want to be paid like men and promoted like men we are asking too much.
1
White men are overrepresented in Silicon Valley, so you're going to find a higher rate of conservatives (and right-wingers and white nationalists) there than in other industries that have more women and people of color.
Then why is Silicon Valley presented as being overwhelmingly Liberal? Your comment makes zero sense.
1
You can't have it both ways people. If you want bakeries to be able to refuse wedding services to gay couples, then Airbnb can refuse its services to whomever it wants, too.
10
But bakers are forced to bake the cakes, and airbnb is not allowed to refuse service. Yet, Google is free to fire an employee for expressing politically incorrect views despite free speech.
3
Fight all you want. There are no one here that would agree with the alt right view point.
The few tech industry trump supporters are despised here.
The few tech industry trump supporters are despised here.
Technology has a natural and inherent and unalterable liberal bias that these alt-right people just have to deal with. The alt-right rejects science. The rejection of science as an elitist conspiracy is one of their well-established political positions. But the only way to build and deploy technology is through science. There is no such thing as an alt-right path towards innovation and progress. There is no path forward in technology that does not depend on science. So there is no path forward in technology that the alt-right is going to find "unbiased" and fair to their social agenda.
If the alt-right won and convinced the whole country to reject science, then the computer or smart phone would be like some magic device that was powered by mysterious magic juice that came somehow out of the wall. Nobody in an alt-right science-rejecting America would have the slightest clue how all that worked. They certainly wouldn't be able to make new ones.
But they have zero gratitude for the liberals who have given them these wonderful things like electromagnetic theory and the Internet and new medications using advanced biology. All they can do is cry about their lack of power over everyone else. It's sad.
If the alt-right won and convinced the whole country to reject science, then the computer or smart phone would be like some magic device that was powered by mysterious magic juice that came somehow out of the wall. Nobody in an alt-right science-rejecting America would have the slightest clue how all that worked. They certainly wouldn't be able to make new ones.
But they have zero gratitude for the liberals who have given them these wonderful things like electromagnetic theory and the Internet and new medications using advanced biology. All they can do is cry about their lack of power over everyone else. It's sad.
9
It's all nonsensical tribalism that will matter not when our new climate reality comes to full fruition and wreaks systemic havoc across the landscape; which is to say that these arguments are a luxury that we won't "enjoy" much longer (thank goodness), as mother earth will rid the earth of this human plague once and for all. Stand by . . .
5
Hate should not be equal.
4
The alt-right will find fault and attack anyone or thing which does not see the world in its narrow scope, so this is no surprise. Maybe the president will direct his 'fire and fury' towards Silicon Valley soon and his tweets will attack their bias, since after all, isn't California his sworn enemy? What a world.
3
Maybe Trump will find his Twitter account deleted as they're under no obligation to provide anyone with service.
3
We wish.
If you mouth off about anything that is against your employer's perceived or established culture ON THE JOB, you put your job at risk...it really is that simple. It does not matter what he said, it matters where he said it and to whom. The (Ctrl +) Alt (+Delete) Right seems to think that anybody can make their views widely known in any workplace. You can express your views however you want but others, such as your employer, can express their views back. That is the beauty of our 1st amendment.
9
These white nationalist dopes are doomed to fail. The culture isn't going backward on that kind of stuff.
4
What did he expect to happen (doing something like that), "Employee of the Quarter"?
6
It's somewhat amusing to see how the tables have turned. This is free market right alt-righties? Remember when it was okay for Hobby Lobby to not provide birth control and bakeries to not serve gay people because freedom? So free market is only ok when it's perpetuating discrimination and inequality? That's fine, just say so.
6
So when Hobby Lobby denies employees access to birth control, it's free speech. Google fires a misogynist and it's suppressing free speech. Nope. No double standard here!
10
If there is anything misogynist about Damore's memo, I can't find it. Unless it is misogynist even to study population level trait and preference differences in men and women and speculate about whether that can explain employment disparities. But that seems far from misogyny to me. Damore insists that the overlaps in the studied male and female traits are far greater than the differences and that individuals cannot be judged on the basis of population studies anyway.
3
Your admission that you can't find anything misogynist about Damore's memo doesn't mean that it isn't misogynist. And your elaboration as to why you think there isn't anything anti-female within his screed is very revealing. Wouldn't it be easier to just admit you think women are less intelligent and capable than men? Yes?
Steve:
Neither is an opinion about gender differences misogynistic. Please identity where the writer has shown hatred of women or ever mistreated a woman for that matter? There is zero evidence behind your misogynistic claim.
You are just projecting onto the writer negative motives because he holds a viewpoint you don't like. It's not only pure conjecture but also very harsh and unfair since you impugn his character on the basis of simply disagreeing with him.
As any adult knows, calling people names because you don't like them is pretty childish behavior. Justifying it by claiming their views warrant such name-calling is just digging in.
Ideologues have convinced themselves they hold the moral high ground. More like "high horse."
Neither is an opinion about gender differences misogynistic. Please identity where the writer has shown hatred of women or ever mistreated a woman for that matter? There is zero evidence behind your misogynistic claim.
You are just projecting onto the writer negative motives because he holds a viewpoint you don't like. It's not only pure conjecture but also very harsh and unfair since you impugn his character on the basis of simply disagreeing with him.
As any adult knows, calling people names because you don't like them is pretty childish behavior. Justifying it by claiming their views warrant such name-calling is just digging in.
Ideologues have convinced themselves they hold the moral high ground. More like "high horse."
1
Nice by Kevin Roose to conflate what occurred in the Google case with racist groups. However, this is about more than a few so-called "alt-right" people and groups. This is about silencing opinions that disagree with the leftist politcal ideology of Silicon Valley.
9
It's about even more than that. It's about whether Google can operate without having open discussions about debatable issues. It's about whether its leadership will yield to the scapegoating demanded by twitter mobs. It's about whether the illiberal cultural left will succeed in defeating the liberal political left--which seems to be happening at Google. And it's about whether the cultural left can succeed in suppressing science it doesn't like, which is also happening at Google. Silicon valley employees have been split about 50/50 on the Damore firing, although even there most opinion was formed by the tilted press coverage and not be reading and discussion of the memo itself. This is an interesting case. It's too bad the memo itself and the action and rationale of Google cannot be the focus here. These are big issues.
1
Nathan:
It is an interesting question. Can an organization that cannot tolerate a discussion of ideas inconsistent with liberal orthodoxy be openminded and creative in its business? Can "orthodox" believers be truly creative?
Google looks a bit different to me now. Not quite so innovative. How could it be?
It is an interesting question. Can an organization that cannot tolerate a discussion of ideas inconsistent with liberal orthodoxy be openminded and creative in its business? Can "orthodox" believers be truly creative?
Google looks a bit different to me now. Not quite so innovative. How could it be?
2
This article deftly uses logical fallacies and misdirection along with hot button terms to exploit most readers' preexisting narratives.
First, list examples of alt-right hot button figureheads' opposition to some Silicon Valley firms. Claim the Alt-Right has a campaign against Silicon Valley.
Next, provide some quick specific examples of controversies.
Imply that concerns and criticisms directed at Silicon Valley that conflict with current "progressive" orthodoxy are "alt-right".
Trump. People with opinions that sound like any of the above are Trump supporters.
First, list examples of alt-right hot button figureheads' opposition to some Silicon Valley firms. Claim the Alt-Right has a campaign against Silicon Valley.
Next, provide some quick specific examples of controversies.
Imply that concerns and criticisms directed at Silicon Valley that conflict with current "progressive" orthodoxy are "alt-right".
Trump. People with opinions that sound like any of the above are Trump supporters.
7
Censoring right wing view points is different from censoring fake news which too often go hand in hand with the right wing spin.
1
It IS legal to discriminate on the basis of someone's politics, unlike race, creed color or sex. Liberals who work for several types of large corporations such as banks or energy providers have always been quite aware of this, and know to keep their views to themselves. They've felt the pressure to contribute a portion of their salary to their employer's political PAC, which of course is always presented as 'voluntary."
I therefore doubt that any conservative politician will give more than lip-service to those crying foul over the tech industries liberal bias. They know they'd have too much to lose.
I therefore doubt that any conservative politician will give more than lip-service to those crying foul over the tech industries liberal bias. They know they'd have too much to lose.
2
Disregarding the content of the message. This shouldn't have been broadcast to all employees in a memo. This should've been brought forward to management and if not accepted by management, he should've put forth his own effort to broadcast it on other platforms. Using an employee email and misusing the memo service is grounds for a serious reprimand. I don't think he should've been fired unless there were other situations that added to this that we are unaware of.
2
I personally don't think he should've been fired but I don't blame a company that would.
That was an idiotic means to "Express"(?) himself or to offer honest criticism/critique.
But companies are quick to rid themselves of potential headaches and controversy.
That was an idiotic means to "Express"(?) himself or to offer honest criticism/critique.
But companies are quick to rid themselves of potential headaches and controversy.
What's your source? I'm interested in getting this right. I have read that Google actually invited employees to comment on its diversity policies and efforts. Google's problem is that its diversity efforts haven't had the effect it had hoped for. Damore was responding to this request and trying to address the central issue seriously. He posted on an internal bulletin board. How it was "leaked" to the outside has not been reported as far as I know. Again, I'd love to see further real facts about this.
3
I also read that Google invited feedback. I highly doubt an organization like Google discourages communication among employees.
1
Any company who accepts Federal funding, and violates a first amendment right of any user of their website, is likely subject to 18 USC § 242 DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW, and 18 USC § 241 CONSPIRACY AGAINST RIGHTS.
There is plenty of case law to support this, although the Courts do not seem to have written precedents in the area of 'online internet users of websites' ... at least not yet.
There is plenty of case law to support this, although the Courts do not seem to have written precedents in the area of 'online internet users of websites' ... at least not yet.
1
Poor little alt-right. Those nasty liberals are picking on them.
The good news is that they are losing power, which explains this all-out effort to try to take over America and the world. Sorry boys and girls you will NOT win this one. WE THE PEOPLE are going to put you back in place and tax back all the wealth you have stolen from us in the last 40+ years and regulate the hell out of your "financial and legal" games.
This will not stand in America. Not now. Not ever again. Socially conscious liberal and progressive Americans - and especially WOMEN - will not let it stand.
The good news is that they are losing power, which explains this all-out effort to try to take over America and the world. Sorry boys and girls you will NOT win this one. WE THE PEOPLE are going to put you back in place and tax back all the wealth you have stolen from us in the last 40+ years and regulate the hell out of your "financial and legal" games.
This will not stand in America. Not now. Not ever again. Socially conscious liberal and progressive Americans - and especially WOMEN - will not let it stand.
7
Because anyone horrified by enforced Groupthink must be "alt-right."
8
Please quote the passage in which that is stated.
1
We must not forget the quote from a wise sage:
"Reality has a well-known liberal bias."
—Stephen Colbert
"Reality has a well-known liberal bias."
—Stephen Colbert
10
When I lived in the San Francisco Bay area I worked as a computer programmer, and wrote lots of letters to the editor of various newspapers. Many were printed.
Generally speaking I am liberal on economic issues, and conservative on social issues. That would seem to put me at odds with what is supposed to be the libertarian political culture over there.
I never got into trouble, but I never criticized or mentioned my employer.
In my humble opinion, as long as one does not advocate violence, or blame the Jews for what he does not like about the United States and his life, his opinions should be permitted.
Generally speaking I am liberal on economic issues, and conservative on social issues. That would seem to put me at odds with what is supposed to be the libertarian political culture over there.
I never got into trouble, but I never criticized or mentioned my employer.
In my humble opinion, as long as one does not advocate violence, or blame the Jews for what he does not like about the United States and his life, his opinions should be permitted.
1
It's one thing to express your opinion, as an individual, on public discussion forums, comment sections and other places designed to have debates of opinion.
It's a wholly different thing to use your company's email address to publicly publish ideas that go NOT against the private opinions of your bosses, but against the public brand image and core business activities (in this case, both are based on science and scientific innovation) of your own company.
Google always made it part of their brand image to base their values and work ethic on scientifically proven ideas about gender, race and religion.
That means that if AS a Google employee, you want to start publicly promoting the exact opposite values, your place is not at Google.
People who believe that this is about freedom of speech get this totally wrong, it isn't. It's about either working to advance the values of your company WHEN your explicitly using your affiliation to that company, or no longer separating your private and professional life (as apparently you clearly never did) in a way that goes against the direction your company wants to publicly take. In that case, your own professional objectives are simply no longer compatibles with the objectives of your company, so there's no reason why they should want to continue to hire you.
It's a wholly different thing to use your company's email address to publicly publish ideas that go NOT against the private opinions of your bosses, but against the public brand image and core business activities (in this case, both are based on science and scientific innovation) of your own company.
Google always made it part of their brand image to base their values and work ethic on scientifically proven ideas about gender, race and religion.
That means that if AS a Google employee, you want to start publicly promoting the exact opposite values, your place is not at Google.
People who believe that this is about freedom of speech get this totally wrong, it isn't. It's about either working to advance the values of your company WHEN your explicitly using your affiliation to that company, or no longer separating your private and professional life (as apparently you clearly never did) in a way that goes against the direction your company wants to publicly take. In that case, your own professional objectives are simply no longer compatibles with the objectives of your company, so there's no reason why they should want to continue to hire you.
1
But how can Google ask the 12.4% of their workforce that he called "neurotic" and unsuited to work in technology to work with this man on any team in the future?
These weren't opinions about random or theoretical people he expressed. They were opinions about his OWN CO-WORKERS. The people he had to do actual work with on real actual projects for the company.
You cannot publicly deride the mental stability or professional qualifications of the people you work with and expect that to have zero impact on your relationship with the company that employs you and all those other people you've just slandered and defamed.
That company is in business to make new technology, not to give their workers a platform to deride and defame 12.4% of the people the company employs.
These weren't opinions about random or theoretical people he expressed. They were opinions about his OWN CO-WORKERS. The people he had to do actual work with on real actual projects for the company.
You cannot publicly deride the mental stability or professional qualifications of the people you work with and expect that to have zero impact on your relationship with the company that employs you and all those other people you've just slandered and defamed.
That company is in business to make new technology, not to give their workers a platform to deride and defame 12.4% of the people the company employs.
2
@ Patricia,
Based on your statement you clearly did not understand what the engineer was saying. It is at it's basis a mathematical argument so I guess I'm not surprised "progressives" don't understand it.
Based on your statement you clearly did not understand what the engineer was saying. It is at it's basis a mathematical argument so I guess I'm not surprised "progressives" don't understand it.
1
Young white male engineers are generally very competitive. How pleased this one must be to find a supportive audience in an "alt-right" radio host.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/10/im-not-a-s...
If the complaining engineer were in top management, the entire organization, replete with people of different ethnicities and cultures, genders (yes), and ages, would be poisoned with fear and loathing. Supposedly that's not what Silicon Valley is about.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/10/im-not-a-s...
If the complaining engineer were in top management, the entire organization, replete with people of different ethnicities and cultures, genders (yes), and ages, would be poisoned with fear and loathing. Supposedly that's not what Silicon Valley is about.
1
Mr. Damore made his comments on a Google company forum, and probably on company time. The memo was not malicious, and though many, myself included, disagree with some of his observations and conclusions, they really were not intimidating. Google was probably within its legal rights in dismissing him, but Google over-reacted, and has done far more harm than possible good.
The fact is that free speech and freedom of the press, particularly when they express conservative points of view, are increasingly being threatened in this country. This suppression includes mainstream conservative perspectives - opinions that are tolerant of other viewpoints, and which do not intimidate or threaten.
The Times and most liberals strongly criticize the SCOTUS Citizen's United decision which upheld the right of a corporation to broadcast a video critical of Hillary Clinton. Ms. Clinton even promised to work to amend the Bill of Rights.
Most universities have faculties (and promotion committees) that are overwhelmingly liberal; conservatives, especially young ones, are afraid to speak. Accusations of "microaggressions" can end a career.
Anyone who raises the possibility that mainstream climate science may exaggerate the role of human activity are quickly labeled "deniers," a highly charged derogatory term.
Free speech is essential to what America is. By suppressing it, the PC movement does us all great harm. Significantly, it is also creating martyrs and empowering the radical right.
The fact is that free speech and freedom of the press, particularly when they express conservative points of view, are increasingly being threatened in this country. This suppression includes mainstream conservative perspectives - opinions that are tolerant of other viewpoints, and which do not intimidate or threaten.
The Times and most liberals strongly criticize the SCOTUS Citizen's United decision which upheld the right of a corporation to broadcast a video critical of Hillary Clinton. Ms. Clinton even promised to work to amend the Bill of Rights.
Most universities have faculties (and promotion committees) that are overwhelmingly liberal; conservatives, especially young ones, are afraid to speak. Accusations of "microaggressions" can end a career.
Anyone who raises the possibility that mainstream climate science may exaggerate the role of human activity are quickly labeled "deniers," a highly charged derogatory term.
Free speech is essential to what America is. By suppressing it, the PC movement does us all great harm. Significantly, it is also creating martyrs and empowering the radical right.
4
You're confounding free speech and the validity of scientifically debunked ideas.
A lot of companies and universities defend science-based debates of opinions. For more than a decade now, the right in this country more and more tries to reject scientifically proven ideas as soon as they personally don't like the outcome, and if someone points out that a fact is a fact, whether you and I like it or not, there's always the same snowflake reaction, today represented by nobody but the very president of the US: if as a conservative you don't like a scientifically proven idea, then that idea MUST be politically biased and not "real science".
That's how you ended up even the entire mainstream media as "liberal".
It all doesn't make any sense.
As to free speech: Damore can debate his personal, private opinions on all discussion forums and comment sections he wants. If he wants more visibility and power for his own subjective opinions, he can write op-eds or become a paid pundit.
But in a capitalist society, as an engineer you cannot expect your boss to hire you if you want to spread scientifically debunked ideas publicly, using your company's email address, and IF your boss decides to build his company's brand image and core activities on respecting science and top-level scientific innovation, you see? That has nothing to do with free speech and everything with adhering to your companies main objectives and strategies for increasing private profits, or not.
A lot of companies and universities defend science-based debates of opinions. For more than a decade now, the right in this country more and more tries to reject scientifically proven ideas as soon as they personally don't like the outcome, and if someone points out that a fact is a fact, whether you and I like it or not, there's always the same snowflake reaction, today represented by nobody but the very president of the US: if as a conservative you don't like a scientifically proven idea, then that idea MUST be politically biased and not "real science".
That's how you ended up even the entire mainstream media as "liberal".
It all doesn't make any sense.
As to free speech: Damore can debate his personal, private opinions on all discussion forums and comment sections he wants. If he wants more visibility and power for his own subjective opinions, he can write op-eds or become a paid pundit.
But in a capitalist society, as an engineer you cannot expect your boss to hire you if you want to spread scientifically debunked ideas publicly, using your company's email address, and IF your boss decides to build his company's brand image and core activities on respecting science and top-level scientific innovation, you see? That has nothing to do with free speech and everything with adhering to your companies main objectives and strategies for increasing private profits, or not.
3
The fact is that free speech and freedom of the press, particularly when they express conservative points of view, are increasingly being threatened in this country.
And yet another Reich Winger who has NO clue about Free Speech.
Anyone who raises the possibility that mainstream climate science may exaggerate the role of human activity are quickly labeled "deniers," a highly charged derogatory term.
Um, If you deny science, you are a denier. If you do not believe in science then every single highly charged derogatory term should be hurled at you. There are not two sides to science.
And yet another Reich Winger who has NO clue about Free Speech.
Anyone who raises the possibility that mainstream climate science may exaggerate the role of human activity are quickly labeled "deniers," a highly charged derogatory term.
Um, If you deny science, you are a denier. If you do not believe in science then every single highly charged derogatory term should be hurled at you. There are not two sides to science.
But Ana Luisa, science depends on open debate. Google cannot build its image on respecting science and then suppress debate on scientific questions. Damore's memo was a serious effort to answer a serious question that had not yet been answered sufficiently. If Google respected science, it would have opened a scientific debate--that is the way science is conducted--and it would have identified and worked through the questionable parts of the memo. Instead, Google symbolically marched him in front of the other employees and symbolically put a bullet in his head. That's hardly the way to build a culture of science.
In addition, Google had asked for responses to its diversity policy and efforts. Damore was responding to that request on an internal bulletin board.
In addition, Google had asked for responses to its diversity policy and efforts. Damore was responding to that request on an internal bulletin board.
2
When did anyone who is not radical right start to be called liberal?
6
"regressive leftism"? I think you just proved Linda's point.
1
Yes, the whole intellectual landscape has become absurdly polarized with--let me say it--fake categories. I do believe that these kinds of boards, in which you most effectively harvest "recommends" or "thumbs up" or "NYT picks" by arguing strongly for one "side" of an issue, are a contributing factor. They shape the discourse. Try arguing for a complex or middle position here and see how much excitement you generate.
2
I wonder how many here actually read the google memo from the engineer. I also wonder of those who read it actually understand it. It is well written and brings up valid points. It is not some misogynistic rant, Google was wrong for firing the guy.
5
I read it. It was not well written. When you present as fact things that are demonstrably wrong you are not making "valid points". That he included debunked myths is what makes it a misogynistic rant.
3
It is not some misogynistic rant,
Then you are a misogynist if you cannot see it. You are blind and part of the problem.
Google was wrong for firing the guy.
Um, California is a hire/fire at will state. Again. you know nothing.
Then you are a misogynist if you cannot see it. You are blind and part of the problem.
Google was wrong for firing the guy.
Um, California is a hire/fire at will state. Again. you know nothing.
Strongly disagree. I've read it a few times, and I honestly cannot see how you come to this conclusion. It is impossible to understand the charges you make since you don't give examples of what you are talking about from the memo itself.
1
Because without a fight. Without an enemy. They have no outrage. And it's the outrage that drives them. Take that away and they have nothing.
5
Since I first heard this story several days ago I've been struck by one thing. People are so upset by the whole diversity issue that they seem to have missed what I think is the most hilarious and ridiculous part. The idea that some pampered Ivy League scholar would actually know anything at all about stress.
This young man doesn't know what he is talking about when it comes to working under stress and I find it amusing that anyone would actually think he did.
Why would anyone bother to read his 10-page manifesto? Plus, 10 pages? Really? This guy really takes himself way too seriously.
This young man doesn't know what he is talking about when it comes to working under stress and I find it amusing that anyone would actually think he did.
Why would anyone bother to read his 10-page manifesto? Plus, 10 pages? Really? This guy really takes himself way too seriously.
4
So does this mean we can neutralize all the industries that have a right-wing bias, such as Big Oil, Big Pharma, coal, weapons manufacturers, etc. Alright then. Let's make this a level playing field!
1
Employees at private companies have no right to freedom of expression. Most workers have no protection from speech-related termination unless they can prove that their employer's motive for firing them violates a federal, state, or local law, which is exceedingly difficult to do. Even government employees, who have First Amendment protection, face significant difficulty when challenging speech-based terminations.
Mr. Damore was an at-will employee, and like all such workers could be dismissed by his employer for any reason (that is, without having to establish "just cause" for termination), and without warning.
There was nothing wrong in the firing of Mr. Damore. These "alt-right" activists should look for a fight elsewhere.
Mr. Damore was an at-will employee, and like all such workers could be dismissed by his employer for any reason (that is, without having to establish "just cause" for termination), and without warning.
There was nothing wrong in the firing of Mr. Damore. These "alt-right" activists should look for a fight elsewhere.
6
I stand with Google. They had every right to fire this troublemaker.
10
At least Mr. Wilson doesn't pretend to be about "free speech." Naming his company Hatreon makes is pretty clear about the intent of this project. And that's the rub here, isn't it? The alt-right's complaints that these platforms are intolerant of their intolerance is absurd.
4
I am a long time fan, reader and subscriber to the NYT. This piece is beneath your standards. Lots of people find the firing of the Google engineer to be outrageous. Does that mean we're all part of the alt-right? His termination "....might have seems like the end of a bizarre, short-lived morality tale." Hardly. I don't need the alt-right to have me riled up.
And then to drag in Breitbart, which "screamed in capital letters about 'blacklists.'" It was a headline. All their headlines are in caps. And the only reason I know that is that I followed the link The NYT used yesterday to report about the blacklists. And sure enough, the word blacklist is what Google managers used, not Breitbart.
Very disappointing and manipulating article on your part.
And then to drag in Breitbart, which "screamed in capital letters about 'blacklists.'" It was a headline. All their headlines are in caps. And the only reason I know that is that I followed the link The NYT used yesterday to report about the blacklists. And sure enough, the word blacklist is what Google managers used, not Breitbart.
Very disappointing and manipulating article on your part.
14
Steve. If you are blind to it you are part of it.
You are blind.
You are blind.
1
Hate and racial intolerance are not allowed as long as they are directed toward anyone not white, male, straight. The amount of open racism and sexism on the left is amazing, and these companies and media biases are obvious to this 100% Democratic voter for national and state elections since 1996. The alt-right is only out in the open because of the progressives gave them an opening by explicitly endorsing racist views. When both sides are racist all the moralizing on the left just makes my eyes roll, the same as the moralizing of the right did a generation ago. I have no home.
2
Chris E, It wasn't the progressives that gave the alt-right the opening to endorse racist views, it was our present so called POTUS. He espoused racist views which made the racists come out of the closet.
2
My eyes, which can't help but see the new racists and segregationist itching to install Jim Crow against the 'privileged', are rolling again.
1
There is something about the narrowly focused engineer mindset that makes non-humanistic alt-right ideologies attractive.
Engineering culture creates software and hardware engineers that are stiffly machinelike and easily programmed. They like black/white solutions and spend their life-time online - looking at machines and monitors. They're not people people since they mostly consider people a waste of time. They hate PC-talk as being inefficient.
Engineering meetings are all about taking a stand, voicing strong opinions, and beating back opposition. The goal is to solve an engineering problem while managing constraints, and if you get it wrong you are properly shamed because an idiot solution can cost lives or market share.
When working with machines it's not necessary to be socially correct and many never grow-up. Engineering-types are often arrogant opinionated people who think they know best. And they do know best engineering-wise, but not about anything requiring broad and deep human experience.
Engineers are narrow tools with narrow utility - they do not know what they don't know. This is why they're so easily manipulated by alt-right ideas. They think simplistically and fail to see confounding people variables. For many engineers a simple solution to a complex problem should work. But they're unable to see or feel the human costs of their simple solution, so human costs are ignored or downgraded, which is why engineers are very often Republicans.
Engineering culture creates software and hardware engineers that are stiffly machinelike and easily programmed. They like black/white solutions and spend their life-time online - looking at machines and monitors. They're not people people since they mostly consider people a waste of time. They hate PC-talk as being inefficient.
Engineering meetings are all about taking a stand, voicing strong opinions, and beating back opposition. The goal is to solve an engineering problem while managing constraints, and if you get it wrong you are properly shamed because an idiot solution can cost lives or market share.
When working with machines it's not necessary to be socially correct and many never grow-up. Engineering-types are often arrogant opinionated people who think they know best. And they do know best engineering-wise, but not about anything requiring broad and deep human experience.
Engineers are narrow tools with narrow utility - they do not know what they don't know. This is why they're so easily manipulated by alt-right ideas. They think simplistically and fail to see confounding people variables. For many engineers a simple solution to a complex problem should work. But they're unable to see or feel the human costs of their simple solution, so human costs are ignored or downgraded, which is why engineers are very often Republicans.
1
It is hard when reality is middle of the road and the FAR FAR FAR right wing including all of Congress now thinks that the middle of the road is "commie/marxist"
6
Every company has the right to establish its corporate values and to implement policies that support those values, as long those values and policies don't conflict with existing law.
If Mr. Damore disagreed with Google's corporate values and HR policies, then he had at least two other options to express his disagreement:
1. Vote with his feet, i.e., get a job at a different company with values more in alignment with his own philosophical beliefs.
2. Provide feedback to management through appropriate channels regarding the adverse effects of their HR policies.
Instead, he used company resources to broadcast a memo to his fellow co-workers that directly undermined Google's corporate values and HR policies, undermining the company's ability to recruit and retain talent. Google had every right to terminate his at-will employment relationship to protect their bottom line.
If Mr. Damore disagreed with Google's corporate values and HR policies, then he had at least two other options to express his disagreement:
1. Vote with his feet, i.e., get a job at a different company with values more in alignment with his own philosophical beliefs.
2. Provide feedback to management through appropriate channels regarding the adverse effects of their HR policies.
Instead, he used company resources to broadcast a memo to his fellow co-workers that directly undermined Google's corporate values and HR policies, undermining the company's ability to recruit and retain talent. Google had every right to terminate his at-will employment relationship to protect their bottom line.
4
The coverage of the memo and surrounding events has been atrocious. It makes me regret my subscription. The manipulation by the NYT and most other major outlets has been both clownishly obvious and sickening. "The Anti-Diversity Manifesto" moniker was such a red meat misrepresentation. "Anti-Diversity" is a signal for everyone to get into lock step and embrace a binary (false choice). "Manifesto" is most certainly meant to invoke images of a crazy, ranting person (Ted K). And that is joined with a blatant attempt to paint anyone that utters any nuanced opinion as "Alt-Right". Disgusting and a great example of why we have an orange lizard in the White House.
8
And you apparently missed the author of said document referring to it as a manifesto. Yeesh. Selective references can't paint any picture you wish. I learned that in high school statistics.
1
Stop worshiping at the tech altar. The people running most of these companies care only about earning obscene incomes, not about contributing to society in any real constructive way or saving the environment or you.
As for white nationalists, they only care about being "fair" if it benefits them.
As for white nationalists, they only care about being "fair" if it benefits them.
3
This is a nonsensical controversy. A corporation makes the rules for its employees, which are usually to keep your political and religious views off the corporate network. I would expect this engineer to be disciplined for promoting his views across the company as I would for an employee of Hobby Lobby expressing a manifesto on the benefits of being Pro-Choice or pro-contraceptive.
3
The left and right have their own sites, question: will this lead to politicizing the search engines? Will Google not allow the alt-right to rise above search page 22?
3
The hypocrisy of conservatism is no more apparent in their pretend disgust for educated progressive companies (which according to Mitch are people, remember?) while simultaneously seeing nothing wrong with the millions spent by Koch brothers and their ilk on misinformation. What conservatives really want is a one party, one message, one thought world. Unfortunately they can't even agree themselves what that is as is apparent from their inept politicians.
2
Someone once said that if God didn't exist it would be necessary to invent Him, or Her, or whatever. In the same sense I would maintain that if the absence of genetic differences in potential between the various categories of humans, e.g. sexes, races, etc., is not the actual reality, it makes a lot of sense to assume that it is. The problems that society would avoid by doing so far exceed any problems, imagined or otherwise, that might arise. One obvious advantage to relating to each individual without preconceived assumptions based on stereotypes is that you avoid the possibility of throttling the potential of someone who might not fit within the limits of your categorizations. There are many more not the least of which involve the avoidance of frustration and resentment.
2
It has been pointed out that using the term "Alt-right" covers up the true nature of this group. I would hope that the media including the NYT cease proliferating this label.
Extreme Right? Racist Right? Misogyninstic, Racist, Xenophobic, Homophobic Right? Because it is not similar to the slight difference between Rock & Alt Rock. A few degrees different. It is the difference between right and abhorrent, incestuous, right. Please stop the development of legitimacy for this dangerous & destructive group.
Extreme Right? Racist Right? Misogyninstic, Racist, Xenophobic, Homophobic Right? Because it is not similar to the slight difference between Rock & Alt Rock. A few degrees different. It is the difference between right and abhorrent, incestuous, right. Please stop the development of legitimacy for this dangerous & destructive group.
2
The Trumpist Right will always find enemies in anything connected with science, education, and information. This happens because Trumpism and the Right work through the propagation of ignorance and misinformation. It then follows logically that, from a Trumpist-Right perspective, anything related to science, education and information must have a liberal bias. It is therefore natural and expected that Trumpism and the Right will view companies at the interface of scientific advancement and the dissemination of information as a source of enemies. None of these companies is more emblematic than Google.
Trumpism and the Right have already noticed that the Press, which by definition is engaged in disseminating information, is plagued by liberal bias. At its psychological root, the wrath of the Trumpist-Right at Silicon Valley is similar, if not identical, to the wrath of ISIS at schools and education.
It is just a matter of time until the Trumpist Right discovers that universities and colleges also have a dangerous liberal bias. Eventually, from their perspective, anyone capable of critical thinking and with a modicum of civic bravery will become a liberal enemy. We saw this history in Nazi Germany, and we see it around the world with dictatorships of all colors. What we see emerging at home is no different.
Trumpism and the Right have already noticed that the Press, which by definition is engaged in disseminating information, is plagued by liberal bias. At its psychological root, the wrath of the Trumpist-Right at Silicon Valley is similar, if not identical, to the wrath of ISIS at schools and education.
It is just a matter of time until the Trumpist Right discovers that universities and colleges also have a dangerous liberal bias. Eventually, from their perspective, anyone capable of critical thinking and with a modicum of civic bravery will become a liberal enemy. We saw this history in Nazi Germany, and we see it around the world with dictatorships of all colors. What we see emerging at home is no different.
6
Hate is an addiction, more addicting than cocaine or any drug. And more mind-altering. The alt-right is completely addicted to this drug. Nothing else matters in their limited world.
Hate Addicts feel a high, every time they go into a tirade about the people they Hate. Their tirade doesn't have to make sense. The endorphins they're putting out don't need sense, they only need the mindless emotion of Hate. There's no point explaining anything to Hate Addicts, anymore than there is in explaining something to someone lost in any other drug "high."
People addicted to Hate hurt themselves and those around them. They rarely contribute anything good to society, because their addiction limits their thinking and takes up all their time and energy. In fact Hate Addicts, more so than any other kind of addict, yearn to destroy everything around them. They obsessively believe they are ridding the world of some evil, even though it is their drug of choice that creates much of the evil in the world. And of course Hate allows the addict to escape all responsibility for everything. At least in their own mind.
The best we can do for these Hate Addicts is to keep them from doing harm to themselves and others. And carry on trying to make the world a better place. They are the only ones who can bring themselves out of this terrible addiction. Unfortunately, most Hate Addicts enjoy their
Hate Addicts feel a high, every time they go into a tirade about the people they Hate. Their tirade doesn't have to make sense. The endorphins they're putting out don't need sense, they only need the mindless emotion of Hate. There's no point explaining anything to Hate Addicts, anymore than there is in explaining something to someone lost in any other drug "high."
People addicted to Hate hurt themselves and those around them. They rarely contribute anything good to society, because their addiction limits their thinking and takes up all their time and energy. In fact Hate Addicts, more so than any other kind of addict, yearn to destroy everything around them. They obsessively believe they are ridding the world of some evil, even though it is their drug of choice that creates much of the evil in the world. And of course Hate allows the addict to escape all responsibility for everything. At least in their own mind.
The best we can do for these Hate Addicts is to keep them from doing harm to themselves and others. And carry on trying to make the world a better place. They are the only ones who can bring themselves out of this terrible addiction. Unfortunately, most Hate Addicts enjoy their
7
I feel there really is something to this notion you illustrate. This is really smart.
I find it borderline irresponsible for NYT to even give the alt-racists this write-up. It's laughable to consider that this fringe minority could in any way affect Silicon Valley's bottom line.
Can we all stop pretending that these people have a legitimate political viewpoint and start calling them what they really are, white male supremists?
Can we all stop pretending that these people have a legitimate political viewpoint and start calling them what they really are, white male supremists?
3
They're actually in the White House now, remember?
As much as I support the fact that Damore was fired (you can't publicly defend scientifically debunked ideas and expect to be hired by a company that has science at the center of its brand image and core activity), his ideas continue to look legitimate by power who today have a LOT of power, so those ideas remain potentially dangerous.
And the only way to destroy ideas or take away their power to destroy is to engage in real, respecting debates with those ideas.
So I support the fact that the NYT, whose mission it is to inform us of what's happening and who thinks what, takes a moment to describe the reaction of a group that today is represented at the highest level in the Executive branch of the government. Ignoring these facts is what would hurt our democracy, not the opposite ... !
As much as I support the fact that Damore was fired (you can't publicly defend scientifically debunked ideas and expect to be hired by a company that has science at the center of its brand image and core activity), his ideas continue to look legitimate by power who today have a LOT of power, so those ideas remain potentially dangerous.
And the only way to destroy ideas or take away their power to destroy is to engage in real, respecting debates with those ideas.
So I support the fact that the NYT, whose mission it is to inform us of what's happening and who thinks what, takes a moment to describe the reaction of a group that today is represented at the highest level in the Executive branch of the government. Ignoring these facts is what would hurt our democracy, not the opposite ... !
Engaging the opposition in respectful debate is a good strategy in the realm of traditional political discussion. However, the alt-right isn't really an alternative to conservatism or far-right politics. It's a cultural ideology based on white male superiority disguised as a political position.
The alt-right loses any honest debate because their views are indefensible, but you're missing the point. To give them a platform is to give them credibility.
As George Bernard Shaw poignantly said, "I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
The alt-right loses any honest debate because their views are indefensible, but you're missing the point. To give them a platform is to give them credibility.
As George Bernard Shaw poignantly said, "I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
1
The extreme-right is very fearful of Silicon Valley because they have billions of dollars at their disposal.
1
The extreme right lives on Silicon Valley servers, and therefore contributes to those billions of dollars at their disposal. Are you really sure they are fearful? Donald Trump has brought us to the brink of nuclear war, is working overtime to get himself impeached, and probably had people in his campaign that outsourced cheating in the elections to the Russian intelligence services. Did anyone from Silicon Valley close any of those accounts?
The only moral compass Silicon Valley has is pointed due money. The rest is window dressing. Even for true believer techies who think they're creating the paradise of the future, the actual day-to-day is either putting someone out of work to amass money or addicting someone to a game to do the same.
What Pachai did was for image and brand. Sort of like Tim Cook standing up to the FBI on the San Bernardino case. Sergei Brin may have shown up at the airport, but if a Ph.D. scientist with 5 years of experience and another 5-6 years of refugee camps, standing in line, and asylum processing shows up in his hiring pool, he or she is just another 40 year old -- old and in the way.
The only moral compass Silicon Valley has is pointed due money. The rest is window dressing. Even for true believer techies who think they're creating the paradise of the future, the actual day-to-day is either putting someone out of work to amass money or addicting someone to a game to do the same.
What Pachai did was for image and brand. Sort of like Tim Cook standing up to the FBI on the San Bernardino case. Sergei Brin may have shown up at the airport, but if a Ph.D. scientist with 5 years of experience and another 5-6 years of refugee camps, standing in line, and asylum processing shows up in his hiring pool, he or she is just another 40 year old -- old and in the way.
What is it these poor bully-victims demand? The right to discriminate? Too bad they're in America. Sorry bout that.
5
Refusing to hand over the company megaphone is not the same thing as censoring.....
3
What would the response of the whole nation, not just the asl-right, have been had this essay instead claimed that African Americans were genetically less suited for tech jobs, or Latinos? Or Jews?
2
They say that, but they're still going to by mobile devices from Apple and/or Samsung, apps and xboxes so they can play their Call of Duty games on. What's really funny is they think "Net neutrality" is a bad idea because Obama was for it.
3
More phony outrage ginned up over a non existent issue by the alt right. Are we surprised? It's all phony outrage all the time with these folks. They wake up mad over nothing, they go to work full of seething resentment and they fitfully try to fall asleep by silently counting resentments.
4
The alt-right has already won the battle with technology, any new efforts are only to erase the last bastion of any thoughtful resistance. The last time I heard 60% of Americans were getting their news from Facebook. Despite Zuckerberg's pious and incredibly cynical promises that Facebook will police itself and more diligently remove fake news postings, Facebook has already been rewarded for spreading enough slime to drown a walrus.
1
Pendulums swing both ways. It has swung against women and minorities for centuries; may need to swing in the other direction before landing in the middle.
1
Damore deserved to be fired for sending this memo on company time and using Google's systems to distribute it. Google had every right to fire at will.
Now substitute the word black or Hispanic or disabled for women in his manifest as read how it sounds.
Now substitute the word black or Hispanic or disabled for women in his manifest as read how it sounds.
1
The alt right is massively confused. They claim there is a bias against their views that is restricted to right wing views. But there is a bias that is equal against extream left wing views also. For instance, if an employee at a company like google was promoting the idea that they should be free to have sex with children, I would guess that might get them fired.
It's not left or right views that get you in trouble, it's views that at harmful to society in general that will.
It's not left or right views that get you in trouble, it's views that at harmful to society in general that will.
3
Are you actually suggesting that having sex with children is a far-left position? If anyone would want to abolish criminal statutes it would be libertarian conservatives who despise the "authoritarian state" using aggression to regulate their personal sexual autonomy.
You, sir, are the confused one.
You, sir, are the confused one.
If refusing to give an equal voice to those who "promote hate, violence or racial intolerance" makes me a hypocrite, so be it. We all choose our own personal comfort level with hypocrisy. President James Monroe opposed slavery, but owned slaves. It could have been worse.
3
I'd have to imagine that if someone were to start posting pro Black Lives Matter material at any of these knockoff sites or using RootBocks to build a funding campaign for an African American family whose child was shot by a police officer, that their policy of allowing anyone to participate despite their political views would change rather quickly.
2
Privacy is every Americans right. Freedom of speech and freedom of the internet,. We must keep the internet free from the government. Stop the Government from spying on everybody. So stop using the spying search engines, us the unbiased no tracking search engine that owns its own search results Lookseek.com try it have a nice day
2
Let the alt-right wall itself off in its own little version of Hell with its own companies and apps. It has done so successfully in other arenas - radio, webchannels, etc. I listen to Rush every now and then, sometimes take a peek at Breitbart just to know what the loonies are saying.
There's no question that techie girls can find breaking into the boys club difficult. In most high school environments, boys run the tech realm and little effort is made to make girls feel welcome.
Many women in tech or engineering would like to take scale back for a few years while raising children, and would appreciate parttime work. Teaching science or math is a possibility, as well working on tech projects with an emphasis on encouraging girls.
There's no question that techie girls can find breaking into the boys club difficult. In most high school environments, boys run the tech realm and little effort is made to make girls feel welcome.
Many women in tech or engineering would like to take scale back for a few years while raising children, and would appreciate parttime work. Teaching science or math is a possibility, as well working on tech projects with an emphasis on encouraging girls.
2
Most people do not realize, including Mr. Damore, that employees have no 1st Amendment Rights in their place of work. Its always been true. And a company has the right to expect their employees to follow their rules about what is and what is not appropriate. Now, people may not like that but its the way it is unless the Feds decided to pass a law changing that. But I thought they didn't like regulations. After all Hobby Lobby is a "Christian based" company and won the right not to pay for birth control for their employees. So I'm afraid that their anger is a bit misplaced. Republicans like to have unfettered capitalism and this is what it looks like. It doesn't matter what my political leanings are, I'm only stating facts, not fake news.
2
The mistake the Silicon Valley companies have made is that they did not fire the engineer for religious reasons. Then the alt-right would be ok with it.
1
"Heads I win, tails you lose."
That's basically the alt-right argument. Only an idiot would fall for it.
When a government employee, or a business-owner, refuses to serve a customer based upon reasons of either racial or sexual discrimination, and is held accountable by a judge that rules that illegal, the alt-right claims "Freedom of speech!", or "Religious freedom!" along with claims of a liberal bias in the courts and talk of corporate 'personhood' being infringed.
Now, the employee is being held accountable by the private corporation and its (private) employee conduct policy, and the alt-right claims a corporate 'liberal bias', along with "Freedom of speech!"
Following the logic of alt-right claims, there is a liberal bias everywhere and anywhere the alt-right are not calling it out. But if the law, and what some would call common decency, are now examples of liberal bias, what does the world look like on alt-right terms? Answer: no law and no decency, and therefore no trust and no society. Sounds a lot like the huckster trying to pull one over on the rubes, i.e. "Heads I win, tails you lose".
The alt-right takes us to be the idiot every thief assumes his mark to be...until a society of rules and laws disabuses the thief of believing by holding him/her accountable for their anti-social behavior.
That's basically the alt-right argument. Only an idiot would fall for it.
When a government employee, or a business-owner, refuses to serve a customer based upon reasons of either racial or sexual discrimination, and is held accountable by a judge that rules that illegal, the alt-right claims "Freedom of speech!", or "Religious freedom!" along with claims of a liberal bias in the courts and talk of corporate 'personhood' being infringed.
Now, the employee is being held accountable by the private corporation and its (private) employee conduct policy, and the alt-right claims a corporate 'liberal bias', along with "Freedom of speech!"
Following the logic of alt-right claims, there is a liberal bias everywhere and anywhere the alt-right are not calling it out. But if the law, and what some would call common decency, are now examples of liberal bias, what does the world look like on alt-right terms? Answer: no law and no decency, and therefore no trust and no society. Sounds a lot like the huckster trying to pull one over on the rubes, i.e. "Heads I win, tails you lose".
The alt-right takes us to be the idiot every thief assumes his mark to be...until a society of rules and laws disabuses the thief of believing by holding him/her accountable for their anti-social behavior.
3
This article brings up a very troubling subject. Should Far Right extremists like the Ku Klux Klan or the American Nazi Party (currently known as the National Socialists White People's Party) be given the full rights of citizenship including the Right of Free Speech and The Right to Free Assembly? Germany does not think so, and they should know. They know a lot more about the dangers posed by Far Right Extremists than we will ever know. Recently, Far Right Extremist from the National Front Party om France, Jean-Marie Le Pen, was convicted of denying the Holocaust. Jean Marie Le Pen is also the founder of the National Front Party, that recently ran the daughter of Jean-Marie Le Pen, Marine Le Pen for President and reached the runoffs. So convicting Jean-Marie Le Pen of Holocaust denial was a big deal but they did not shrink from their obligation to enforce the law in a constitutional democracy. Holocaust Denial is perfectly legal in the United States. Should it be? I have grave doubts about this. After WWII, some dozen members of the American Nazi Party (currently known as the National Socialist White People's Party) were hanged for giving aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war. Is this spirit still alive? I hope so. But we will see.
Also, note that the Far Right worldwide is supported by Russia, just like back in the days of the Stalin H word pact. Some things change, and some things don't.
Also, note that the Far Right worldwide is supported by Russia, just like back in the days of the Stalin H word pact. Some things change, and some things don't.
3
The alt-right is a deceptive diabolical duplicitous euphemism for good old-fashioned white American male supremacist conservative evangelical Confederate Ku Klux Klan misogynist bigoted xenophobia.
8
Geez, why do smart people, techies, college students, almost always lean left, what could it be. Hmmmmm.
8
Corporations aren't democracies. Google is a global company. People forget this due to the Supreme Court ruling that "corporations are people too". If they are people they are global people and do not vote in elections in US.
I find this 24 year old's memo hate speech. It would be one thing for him to state at work verbally. However, sending out a memo to all. How could Google ever promote him as he would clearly discriminate against women and others he deemed not Republican. I'm on Google's side. And BTW, I was in tech my whole life and was an awesome programmer who could also communicate to clients. How dare he make this statement against my sex. I see his statement as a personal affront.
I find this 24 year old's memo hate speech. It would be one thing for him to state at work verbally. However, sending out a memo to all. How could Google ever promote him as he would clearly discriminate against women and others he deemed not Republican. I'm on Google's side. And BTW, I was in tech my whole life and was an awesome programmer who could also communicate to clients. How dare he make this statement against my sex. I see his statement as a personal affront.
8
Your knee-jerk characterization of a thoughtful person's attempt to reconcile contradictions is itself hate speech.
4
Employees are entitled to express their views about whatever they want, that is freedom of speech. Companies have a right to fire people, often without any particular reason for it. That is why for the most part, people have been wise enough not to express their political views at work, someone is bound to take offense. If you disagree with the way the company does business, then either become the CEO or go work for someone else. Hey, you can always run for president. Work is work, it is not a political forum.
1
When your opinions are blatantly sexist and/or racist, they do not merit respect.
6
All opinions deserve respect, as do the people who defend them.
But you can't expect to keep your job if you want to publicly spread your opinions using your company's email address, when those opinions aren't science based and you're working for a company that wants to promote science ... .
The only way to get rid of, over time, opinions that have horrible consequences is to engage in free, respectful debates, in the places designed to cultivate exactly that, in a democracy (discussion forums, comment sections of media websites, etc.).
But you can't expect to keep your job if you want to publicly spread your opinions using your company's email address, when those opinions aren't science based and you're working for a company that wants to promote science ... .
The only way to get rid of, over time, opinions that have horrible consequences is to engage in free, respectful debates, in the places designed to cultivate exactly that, in a democracy (discussion forums, comment sections of media websites, etc.).
Ana--with all due respect to you--opinions don't deserve respect. Not so they deserve acceptance. Human beings do--but we do NOT have to respect nor accept ignorant perspectives. That is normalizing to
these folks, which in large part is why they've crawled out from under their proverbial rocks.
these folks, which in large part is why they've crawled out from under their proverbial rocks.
1
@ UN
I suppose that in theory you're correct. In practice, however, most people tend to identify with their own opinions, so attack them and they feel as if their very essence as a unique individual is being attacked, and once that's the case, you cannot possibly have a rational debate anymore, as people tend to cling to their own perception of their identity as their only real anchor in the world and foot in reality.
That's why I see only one solution: in a democracy, you have to respect ALL opinions. That simply means that in a debate, they deserve to be taken seriously and, if we think that's possible/necessary, properly refuted - and as many times refuted as someone continues to believe in them and identifies with them.
Ignoring or despising ideas never worked, when the goal is to avoid their destructive consequences.
I suppose that in theory you're correct. In practice, however, most people tend to identify with their own opinions, so attack them and they feel as if their very essence as a unique individual is being attacked, and once that's the case, you cannot possibly have a rational debate anymore, as people tend to cling to their own perception of their identity as their only real anchor in the world and foot in reality.
That's why I see only one solution: in a democracy, you have to respect ALL opinions. That simply means that in a debate, they deserve to be taken seriously and, if we think that's possible/necessary, properly refuted - and as many times refuted as someone continues to believe in them and identifies with them.
Ignoring or despising ideas never worked, when the goal is to avoid their destructive consequences.
The hypocrisy of the alt-right movement never ceases to amaze me. They argue in favor of giving corporations the same rights as an individual but when the corporation exercises those rights in a way that challenges their beliefs they cry "foul." Is Breitbart advocating the first amendment only applies to males and male run corporations thereby returning the United States to a country legislating female disenfranchisement? Mr. Damore is entitled to his opinion but he chose to take the job at a company where the employment policies and guidelines were clearly laid out before he said "yes." If he found them offensive why did he chose to accept their offer of employment in the first place? It's disappointing that the article's author failed to ask these questions or call out the consequences on women of both Mr. Damore's and the alt-Right's point of view. I for one do not want to see women disenfranchised and relegated to child bearing/rearing. As we saw in the ACA debate, it was courageous women looking out for all citizens that kept the insanity at bay. Mr. Damore is looking for publicity and he got it, there's no other explanation for his behavior after consenting to Google's policies when he accepted employment.
3
Drivel are not ideas.
3
The conservative views the alt-right promotes are extreme, even by conservative standards. It is good to see them isolating themselves in new channels like Gab; although, it's unlikely they will actually shift their efforts to those platforms. Their presence on mainstream channels like YouTube and Twitter provides them with a false cover of legitimacy, and the leaders of this movement know this.
1
Isn't it interesting how Conservatives like to politicize EVERYTHING? The Supreme Court, tech companies, religion - where does this madness end? I've read several pages of the Google engineer's "manifesto" - it's absurd, and any employer would have fired an employee for such a document circulated throughout the company. Let's not turn this into some baloney political prosecution.
4
Political correctness is utterly and completely irrelevant to the obtuse assertion by an employee that gender really does determine how suitable and successful someone can be. The excuses for not allowing females equal opportunity and advancement are precisely the kind of drivel that Damore presented as the likely reason for the highly skewed ratios of males to females in tech...and elsewhere. All of the progress, far from completed, regarding gender equality in the workplace is only because this sort of nonsense has been justifiably laid to rest...or has it. Good grief, his opinion is his, but he cannot be allowed to discriminate against women in the workplace using it. Nor can he retain his position in the company as a result. Free speech as a concept isn't relative in this regard.
Does being "conservative" really have to mean believing women are less capable, less valuable in companies of all kinds and sizes? If so, then being conservative is rather obtuse. Companies have a moral and legal obligation to promote and insist on equality in terms of gender. If qualified, talented and valuable to the organization, gender is absolutely irrelevant. It's well documented that companies with women at the highest levels and on boards of directors are more innovative and more profitable. Why? Because women are more collaborative while men live in their silos.
Eclectic Pragmatism — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
Eclectic Pragmatist — https://medium.com/eclectic-pragmatism
Does being "conservative" really have to mean believing women are less capable, less valuable in companies of all kinds and sizes? If so, then being conservative is rather obtuse. Companies have a moral and legal obligation to promote and insist on equality in terms of gender. If qualified, talented and valuable to the organization, gender is absolutely irrelevant. It's well documented that companies with women at the highest levels and on boards of directors are more innovative and more profitable. Why? Because women are more collaborative while men live in their silos.
Eclectic Pragmatism — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
Eclectic Pragmatist — https://medium.com/eclectic-pragmatism
3
Does being "conservative" really have to mean believing women are less capable, less valuable in companies of all kinds and sizes?
For these "men" yes. There have been structures in place in our culture that have artificially kept these "men" at the top. Starting with Griswold in 1965, these artificial structures have been dismantled giving women, people of color, the disabled, LGBT Americans more opportunity and fewer structural road blocks. Now that this is the case these toxic "males" are realizing that they have to WORK to get ahead. They are no longer assumed to be in control because of their exterior genitalia and their white skin. This makes them MAD. Women MUST be artificially suppressed so these "men" can be in control without effort, work or thinking.
For these "men" yes. There have been structures in place in our culture that have artificially kept these "men" at the top. Starting with Griswold in 1965, these artificial structures have been dismantled giving women, people of color, the disabled, LGBT Americans more opportunity and fewer structural road blocks. Now that this is the case these toxic "males" are realizing that they have to WORK to get ahead. They are no longer assumed to be in control because of their exterior genitalia and their white skin. This makes them MAD. Women MUST be artificially suppressed so these "men" can be in control without effort, work or thinking.
1
Not everyone who disagrees with the highly ideologically biased tactics of these corporations is "alt-right". I'm left of center and I think these "alt-right" critics have a point: when corporations become close in power to the government (controlling almost entire market of ideas) then ideological neutrality in dealing with clients becomes key to how actual democracy works.
I'm not talking about whom they hire or how they describe themselves. I'm referring to denial of services to anyone vocal who is right of Mao. Even though this is clearly not a First Amendment issue, pretending to offer services and products regardless of client's ideology is at least ethically challenging.
It's also interesting how the author uses the "alt-right" buzzword and how the subsequent comments react by now calling those who are even concerned about the actions of the corporations "racists" and "misogynists".
BTW, I'm a PdD scientist currently developing machine vision algorithms and stand politically mostly on the left.
I'm not talking about whom they hire or how they describe themselves. I'm referring to denial of services to anyone vocal who is right of Mao. Even though this is clearly not a First Amendment issue, pretending to offer services and products regardless of client's ideology is at least ethically challenging.
It's also interesting how the author uses the "alt-right" buzzword and how the subsequent comments react by now calling those who are even concerned about the actions of the corporations "racists" and "misogynists".
BTW, I'm a PdD scientist currently developing machine vision algorithms and stand politically mostly on the left.
4
This firing and the unproportional spectacle around it demonstrates only one thing: the increasing inability to actually discuss political topics without being acused to belong to the far right or far left activist groups. That is actually the result of the so called "social media" which are not used to be confronted with opposing opinions, discuss them without verbal assaults and come to a conclusion at some point. In fact: the "social media" are anti-communicative as user usually accumulate in interest groups that share the same opinions or world views. It has become increasingly harder to actually engage in real discussions. They have been replaced with simplistic phrases on the lowest level. I am trying my part to bridge the gap and voice my opinion on breitbart etc. - just to make sure that there is a least a little bit of a discussion left. Often painful...but necessary in my view. We are living in the same country and have to get along with each other. Respecting opposing opinions is a part of that. Finding common grounds is the goal.
3
One does not debate with a Nazi. One does not debate with ISIS. One does not debate with Boko Haram.
One eliminates them.
One eliminates them.
1
Seems the "Live and Let Live" crowd wants to impose it's views of others. I guess Brietbart and "The Real News" platforms to spin their own propaganda is not robust enough to compete. Better put your "Big Boy" pants on.
1
This should be laughable since Damore was fired not for being conservative but for being cro-magnon, if not a jerk. In a peer review company, putting in writing that you think your female colleagues are biologically less suited to a given role flatly disqualifies you for employment and not just at Google.
Perhaps it is notable that Damore has stirred up support from the ooze of the internet but let's also be clear that that is where it coming. Legitimizing and giving broader voice to opinions from the likes of the justly disgraced Yiannopoulos, the Sandy Hook denying Infowars and shamelessly race-baiting Breitbart is as much the problem as anything. I don't advocate pretending they don't exist but their opinions exist and reside in the cultural trash heap of 2017 and history will confirm that. We've seen this ilk before. They are not new, except for their rise to prominence again in this lifetime.
Further, what about this modern version of conservatism is compatible with Silicon Valley, not culturally but intellectually? These people can't even acknowledge the truth of what happens when you heat a compound like carbon dioxide - you're telling us they are the future of software engineering and technology?
For a group that constantly scolds the other side for the very same thing, these people are in a perpetual state of victimhood and martydom.
Perhaps it is notable that Damore has stirred up support from the ooze of the internet but let's also be clear that that is where it coming. Legitimizing and giving broader voice to opinions from the likes of the justly disgraced Yiannopoulos, the Sandy Hook denying Infowars and shamelessly race-baiting Breitbart is as much the problem as anything. I don't advocate pretending they don't exist but their opinions exist and reside in the cultural trash heap of 2017 and history will confirm that. We've seen this ilk before. They are not new, except for their rise to prominence again in this lifetime.
Further, what about this modern version of conservatism is compatible with Silicon Valley, not culturally but intellectually? These people can't even acknowledge the truth of what happens when you heat a compound like carbon dioxide - you're telling us they are the future of software engineering and technology?
For a group that constantly scolds the other side for the very same thing, these people are in a perpetual state of victimhood and martydom.
4
"Minutes after Mr. Damore’s firing was announced, a flurry of right-wing websites, message boards and social media cliques sprang into action, eager to paint the episode as another example of liberal political correctness run amok."
Was it anything else that that?
I read Mr. Damore's memo, and I didn't find anything hostile, egregious, or extremist about his points. He simply pointed out, taking great pains not to aggravate oversensitive people, where Leftist ideology as applied in his company was walking on its head, and provided his own counter-arguments and solutions to achieve those "progressive" goals Google purports to pursue. Google leadership, true to the current Liberal state of mind, seemingly realized it had no objective arguments to oppose that would validate their point of view and policies, and discredit his, so decided to "shut him down" by firing him. The PC Alt-Left holds onto such shaky and contradictory ideologies that it should expect reasonable people to speak up and call them out on their most ridiculous ideas. And perhaps prepare better arguments than "we're right; and if you don't agree with us, you're a sexist/fascist bigot". Totalitarian attitudes like that worked in Soviet Russia, Pol Pot's Cambodia, and evidently Kim's North Korea. But thankfully, stateside, there are still (some) people capable of critical thinking, and willing to engage political opponents in civilized policy discussions. Unfortunately, that's not part of Google's culture.
Was it anything else that that?
I read Mr. Damore's memo, and I didn't find anything hostile, egregious, or extremist about his points. He simply pointed out, taking great pains not to aggravate oversensitive people, where Leftist ideology as applied in his company was walking on its head, and provided his own counter-arguments and solutions to achieve those "progressive" goals Google purports to pursue. Google leadership, true to the current Liberal state of mind, seemingly realized it had no objective arguments to oppose that would validate their point of view and policies, and discredit his, so decided to "shut him down" by firing him. The PC Alt-Left holds onto such shaky and contradictory ideologies that it should expect reasonable people to speak up and call them out on their most ridiculous ideas. And perhaps prepare better arguments than "we're right; and if you don't agree with us, you're a sexist/fascist bigot". Totalitarian attitudes like that worked in Soviet Russia, Pol Pot's Cambodia, and evidently Kim's North Korea. But thankfully, stateside, there are still (some) people capable of critical thinking, and willing to engage political opponents in civilized policy discussions. Unfortunately, that's not part of Google's culture.
6
Thank Heavens you are in France. Progesssove is not a bad word--hence the word root--PROGRESS. Typically, white men defend this position as they are finding their illegitimate foothold being shaved away by women, LGBTQ, minorities, et. Al. There's nothing new to this guy--Neanderthal white men have been pounding their fists for centuries. Time to prepare for progress and competition. Whining about it indicates how threatened they are by progress.
1
Damore and those like him have two key views that are the heigh of hypocrisy:
- If more men than women are attracted to tech fields that's just how it is and working to adjust it is wrong.
- If more liberal minded people are attracted to an industry we should fight to balance it out.
These views could not be more contradictory. A rational position can hold one of these views but not both. It exposes him and those like him for what they really are, selfish people.
- If more men than women are attracted to tech fields that's just how it is and working to adjust it is wrong.
- If more liberal minded people are attracted to an industry we should fight to balance it out.
These views could not be more contradictory. A rational position can hold one of these views but not both. It exposes him and those like him for what they really are, selfish people.
3
Will you please stop calling them by the name they want to be called, the "Alt- RIght"? Call them what they are: the "White Supremacist/Anti-Semitic" Right. When you call them the "Alt-Right" it only hides their true nature and helps make the unacceptable acceptable.
4
You win arguments by presenting valid points of view, not calling people names....
In the grownup world, that is.
In the grownup world, that is.
3
Proud "Alt-Right" Hispanic female.
You've gotten us all wrong. Fact is, we aren't all "White Nationalists," Islamaphobes, or any of the academia-invented buzzwords that we are so frequently charged with.
Many of us read the New York Times.
I have no ties to any particular religion, and believe in a few basic principles - say, economic and foreign policy - that just aren't represented anywhere else these days. I work problems from basic principles.
Quick example: We've spent x-trillion in the Middle East since 9/11. The Middle East is undeniably worse. Therefore, we should come up with a way to leave since it's been 16 years - period. Yes, this is a long conversation but think of it like starting every physics problem from F=ma.
The long-promoted idea by the Left, that traditional - or "establishment" Republicans - have the middle class voting against their own interests, resonated with me. Doesn't mean I'll switch parties. Quite the opposite - I'll just vote them out (note: that doesn't mean shutdown and shoutdown people at their place of business - it literally means vote). I'm doing my best to include new blood. I'm being the change I'd like to see.
I will concede that there are a few bold Internet personalities out there, but they're certainly not representative of the larger populist movement that has swept through parts of Europe and the US. "Don't feed the trolls."
Have a nice day everyone. There's more to life than politics.
You've gotten us all wrong. Fact is, we aren't all "White Nationalists," Islamaphobes, or any of the academia-invented buzzwords that we are so frequently charged with.
Many of us read the New York Times.
I have no ties to any particular religion, and believe in a few basic principles - say, economic and foreign policy - that just aren't represented anywhere else these days. I work problems from basic principles.
Quick example: We've spent x-trillion in the Middle East since 9/11. The Middle East is undeniably worse. Therefore, we should come up with a way to leave since it's been 16 years - period. Yes, this is a long conversation but think of it like starting every physics problem from F=ma.
The long-promoted idea by the Left, that traditional - or "establishment" Republicans - have the middle class voting against their own interests, resonated with me. Doesn't mean I'll switch parties. Quite the opposite - I'll just vote them out (note: that doesn't mean shutdown and shoutdown people at their place of business - it literally means vote). I'm doing my best to include new blood. I'm being the change I'd like to see.
I will concede that there are a few bold Internet personalities out there, but they're certainly not representative of the larger populist movement that has swept through parts of Europe and the US. "Don't feed the trolls."
Have a nice day everyone. There's more to life than politics.
4
Have you ever been asked if you're here "legally?"
If so, continuing to identify yourself as "alt-right" is like continuing to hit yourself in the head with hammer.
You'll feel so good when you stop.
If so, continuing to identify yourself as "alt-right" is like continuing to hit yourself in the head with hammer.
You'll feel so good when you stop.
1
Defending free speech? That's rich. Would they defend a guy who writes a memo claiming that the alt-right is made up of genetically stupid people?
4
Just a few thoughts here since I've been working in tech since the 90s.
I have read the "manifesto" and many responses to it - left, right, and indifferent.
First the manifesto is anything but. The guy totally revealed himself to be someone who is obviously more obsessed with "right" and "left" than about doing a good job - which is what he was hired for, not ranting and raving about stuff he knows little about except for what he googles. This was obvious in his "citations" - the research that people have been doing for decades on invalidates nearly every one of his points. He claims to be pro-diversity but his words (and clearly his actions) show he's anything but.
Second - a mature person knows better than to do something like this in a workplace. Mature people understand that you work at the pleasure of your employers. If you don't like it, get out. There is no "free speech" in the workplace. I don't know why millenials in particular don't understand this. You don't have free speech rights in the workplace. You don't get to voice this kind of an opinion and not expect to get fired. I would have walked this kid out and mailed him his personal belongings.
Third - the "alt right" is white supremecy patriarchy of yore, just repackaged; and they are dying to be mainstream legitimate. That can't happen in this country. We've come to far to go backwards now. The fact that there is a whole new generation of them means we just need to work harder to educate people.
I have read the "manifesto" and many responses to it - left, right, and indifferent.
First the manifesto is anything but. The guy totally revealed himself to be someone who is obviously more obsessed with "right" and "left" than about doing a good job - which is what he was hired for, not ranting and raving about stuff he knows little about except for what he googles. This was obvious in his "citations" - the research that people have been doing for decades on invalidates nearly every one of his points. He claims to be pro-diversity but his words (and clearly his actions) show he's anything but.
Second - a mature person knows better than to do something like this in a workplace. Mature people understand that you work at the pleasure of your employers. If you don't like it, get out. There is no "free speech" in the workplace. I don't know why millenials in particular don't understand this. You don't have free speech rights in the workplace. You don't get to voice this kind of an opinion and not expect to get fired. I would have walked this kid out and mailed him his personal belongings.
Third - the "alt right" is white supremecy patriarchy of yore, just repackaged; and they are dying to be mainstream legitimate. That can't happen in this country. We've come to far to go backwards now. The fact that there is a whole new generation of them means we just need to work harder to educate people.
11
These pathetic fascists have got to be the whiniest people on the planet.
Just like their hero, Trump.
Just like their hero, Trump.
4
So? There are conflicting views and what is wrong with that? Unless of course those views differ from yours and then they are an unwelcome attack.
These are corporations and they have their rights too.
These are corporations and they have their rights too.
Whether it be the "alt-right", the mainstream right, conservatives in general, or just garden variety republicans the story and tactic remains the same: cry "bias" anytime an entity espouses positions that don't agree with their agenda. This is designed to help their base rationalize that these entities, simply acting based on law, verifiable facts, and common sense, is bias. And so it goes...
3
Workplaces in corporate America are not democratic. If you want more democracy on the job, FORM A UNION!
5
James Damore was an obvious plant by the alt-right. You'll notice "minutes after (his) firing was announced" the alt-right websites & social media went beserk. This is all intentional and the right wing is trying to frame and blackmail companies into only hiring people who think like they do.
Any business has t make decisions about what is best for their company's overall culture. Is it inclusiveness and a representation of people of (and from) the world, or should it's employee base look, sound, and talk like the Deep South in the 19th Century?
Companies like Google seek out engineers from other countries so they will bring their unique perspective and creativity to the company's goals and products. If America's high tech companies remain in lockstep with 1940s Germany, they will lose market share and revenue. They know how to run a business - it's obvious by their financial success.
The "alt-right activists" like Damore should go to Atlanta and open a buggy whip factory. We can all guess on whom they would use their whips. The rest of the world keeps on turning.
Any business has t make decisions about what is best for their company's overall culture. Is it inclusiveness and a representation of people of (and from) the world, or should it's employee base look, sound, and talk like the Deep South in the 19th Century?
Companies like Google seek out engineers from other countries so they will bring their unique perspective and creativity to the company's goals and products. If America's high tech companies remain in lockstep with 1940s Germany, they will lose market share and revenue. They know how to run a business - it's obvious by their financial success.
The "alt-right activists" like Damore should go to Atlanta and open a buggy whip factory. We can all guess on whom they would use their whips. The rest of the world keeps on turning.
4
So now the Trumpians are complaining because tech companies aren't giving stupidity equal time?
5
I smell a big pile of Koch money behind this "movement"...
5
And Mercer money from Robert Mercer, the Breitbart supporter
Classic right wing technique, accuse somebody of being on the other side so that they will start to promote your side.
1
why does a site have to allow views and opinions that are prejudicial?
2
These poor cry-baby victimized Alt-Wrongers aren't being treated fairly by YouTube, Google, and Airbnb? Oh boohoo, cupcakes. Suck it up.
If you don't like YouTube or Apple or the NYTimes or CNN, make your own. Or watch Fox, Breitbart, or 4chan. Go rent from Airkkk. Or do what Mooch says Steve Bannon does.
If you don't like YouTube or Apple or the NYTimes or CNN, make your own. Or watch Fox, Breitbart, or 4chan. Go rent from Airkkk. Or do what Mooch says Steve Bannon does.
9
This will naturally assure abundant liberal support for these tech behemoths !
1
We just went through an election cycle where Russian intelligence tried and probably did influence our elections through social media and the internet. Having our enemies choose our elected officials is a frightening reality and could lead to the demise of our democracy. The larger internet tech companies stepping up to weed out lies, fake news and propaganda should be welcomed by all Americans, but obviously the alt right prefers to line up with our enemies because without fake news and propaganda they would cease to exist.
1
The cure for this is obvious. Tech companies need to sue alt-right media for their pervasive right-wing bias. It's not like there's an absence of probable cause. Sue them for all they're worth.
2
I appreciate the reporting here, but it should also be made clear that the revulsion to Damore's firing is widespread and goes way beyond alt-right groups to liberal groups who are strongly opposed to the suppressive and vicious reaction of Google to Damore's arguments. Illiberal cultural leftism is now as dangerous to American liberty as the alt-right. I mean this seriously. The suppression of speech is now a crusade of the cultural left. Here is Adam Galinsky, a Professor at Columbia Business School, writing at Fortune.com(http://fortune.com/2017/08/09/google-james-damore-diversity/) : “The use of biological arguments to explain sex differences creates a clear and present danger to inclusion by potentially producing a hostile work environment, not only for women, but for all employees.” This kind of suppression of speech is not only the end of reason. It is also the end of liberty.
7
Except that Damore could have expressed himself freely AND publicly everywhere, as long as he didn't link his opinions to Google's brand.
Why should a private sector company have to keep an employee who explicitly and publicly attacks its own brand image?
Google has "science" as one of its core values. If its employees start to publicly spread opinions based on ideas that science has debunked long ago already, AND it should keep them, as you suggest, simply because of "freedom of speech", then how can any company ever build the brand image it wants ... ?
Personally, I have been fired once, in my life, and it was because my idea of where to take the company, in the future, wasn't compatible at all with the direction that the managing board wanted to take. They respected my opinions, it's just that they wanted to build a different company than I did (and I even didn't make those opinions public ...).
There's nothing "liberal" about taking this kind of decisions. It's simply the right of every managing board to choose its own position on the market, period ...
Why should a private sector company have to keep an employee who explicitly and publicly attacks its own brand image?
Google has "science" as one of its core values. If its employees start to publicly spread opinions based on ideas that science has debunked long ago already, AND it should keep them, as you suggest, simply because of "freedom of speech", then how can any company ever build the brand image it wants ... ?
Personally, I have been fired once, in my life, and it was because my idea of where to take the company, in the future, wasn't compatible at all with the direction that the managing board wanted to take. They respected my opinions, it's just that they wanted to build a different company than I did (and I even didn't make those opinions public ...).
There's nothing "liberal" about taking this kind of decisions. It's simply the right of every managing board to choose its own position on the market, period ...
5
How is liberalism dangerous? Trump won.
"It is also the end of liberty."
Sheer hyperbolic nonsense. Google has the absolute right to police conduct by it's employees that threatens to damage it's brand. Those who don't like Google's actions have the right to protest. That's liberty.
Sheer hyperbolic nonsense. Google has the absolute right to police conduct by it's employees that threatens to damage it's brand. Those who don't like Google's actions have the right to protest. That's liberty.
3
I'm at a corporate HQ in flyover country. The executives are extreme conservatives (climate change deniers, Trump fans, etc.). I deal with their biases all the time, but I manage to get along. Because I am an adult and a professional. The alt-right is a bunch of cry babies. Not every company culture will agree with them. Liberals manage to find a way to succeed without loudly complaining, they should as well.
6
Well, if the alt-right thinks they're censored then they should look beyond Silicon Valley. Fact is, P&G (along with many other Fortune 500s) pulled their digital ads last year because they don't want their brands associated with alt-right views. If alt-right folks don't like it, don't use these brands - from Pampers to YouTube.
As for Mr Damore, he's views are illogical, unsubstantiated, and misogynistic. As a Dad of a teen daughter going into the sciences, I'm insulted.
Additionally, California is an Employment At Will state. Which means that Mr Damore can be fired at any time, for any reason ... including no reason at all. Google legally didn't need to give him a reason; they could've just said 'your services are no longer needed' and nothing else. They did him a favor by providing a learning experience; if he want's to work in Corporate America, he'll have to modify his at work behavior.
As for Mr Damore, he's views are illogical, unsubstantiated, and misogynistic. As a Dad of a teen daughter going into the sciences, I'm insulted.
Additionally, California is an Employment At Will state. Which means that Mr Damore can be fired at any time, for any reason ... including no reason at all. Google legally didn't need to give him a reason; they could've just said 'your services are no longer needed' and nothing else. They did him a favor by providing a learning experience; if he want's to work in Corporate America, he'll have to modify his at work behavior.
8
It could be noted, as well, that the whole "At Will Employment" is a right-wing policy made manifest. I suppose they don't like this if it is (horrors) applied to themselves.
2
Completely agree.
Yawn. What are these snowflakes going to do? Boycott google?
They all just want clicks and money.
They all just want clicks and money.
1
Hey right-wingers - industries are free to have biases. Get over it.
2
This was planned. I do not believe that memo was concocted by one man. It reeks of right-wing dark money.
1
So, there are snowflakes on the right.
3
I do honestly wonder if these people truly believe that they represent more than a tiny, tiny fraction of Americans. This would be like creating parallel versions of all these services exclusively for Mormons, or for Brazilian-Americans. Sure the population is out there but this is just another way for a small group of people to wall themselves off EVEN further from the mainstream.
2
As usual, the far right confuses freedom of speech with freedom from consequences. Mr. Damore is free to believe whatever he likes about women's capabilities as engineers. However, just as believing the moon is made of cheese should rightfully disqualify me from holding a job at NASA, he has been rightfully disqualified from continuing to work at one of the world's most influential tech companies due to his assertion of a provably incorrect belief. It's not in the best interests of a free market for anyone to retain an employee whose beliefs conflict with effective job performance--whether they are a county clerk in Kentucky who won't sign marriage licenses, a pharmacist who objects to birth control prescriptions, or a bro in Silicon Valley who can't let go of the archaic idea that women are hardwired to be overly emotional and bad at math. Get a grip.
9
Exactly, that sums it up perfectly.
What the GOP today doesn't get is that science is about proving objective facts.
That they can't deal with those facts, or modify their own philosophy in order to integrate them in their world view, only shows that apparently today's GOP isn't very good at hiring/motivating intellectuals and philosophers who can develop a coherent conservatism.
So they now believe that they have to run away from science and facts, into some alternative world based on lies, in order to be able to keep their own jobs and get re-elected. And as a consequence, as only Democrats continue to be excited by scientific innovation, they try to make their base believe that most "science" today isn't objective at all, but politically "biased" and as a consequence worthless.
It's sad to see that this is happening in the country that still has the world's most innovative and best universities.
And frankly, it's sad for our democracy, as a democracy can only thrive when you have at least TWO serious political parties.
Where's the Grand Old Party ... ?
What the GOP today doesn't get is that science is about proving objective facts.
That they can't deal with those facts, or modify their own philosophy in order to integrate them in their world view, only shows that apparently today's GOP isn't very good at hiring/motivating intellectuals and philosophers who can develop a coherent conservatism.
So they now believe that they have to run away from science and facts, into some alternative world based on lies, in order to be able to keep their own jobs and get re-elected. And as a consequence, as only Democrats continue to be excited by scientific innovation, they try to make their base believe that most "science" today isn't objective at all, but politically "biased" and as a consequence worthless.
It's sad to see that this is happening in the country that still has the world's most innovative and best universities.
And frankly, it's sad for our democracy, as a democracy can only thrive when you have at least TWO serious political parties.
Where's the Grand Old Party ... ?
4
Great post. Smacks of reality, which is so difficult for many to deal with these days.
3
And aren't these the same ideologues who advocated to allow Hobby Lobby and others to deny basic rights to LGBT and others based on 'religious convictions'?
5
Some years ago I sat in a 2-day diversity training meeting at my chemical company. Employees were assured by the facilitator that discussion groups were a 'safe zone' where there would be no retaliation for statements of opinion. Some remarkable, prejudiced views were openly debated as a result, which helped diffuse some hidden tensions. On the whole it was a good forum for showing the strength of diversity.
At one point though, a woman PhD chemist asked about signs and posters. She described how she would often post articles she found provocative even if she disagreed with them as a way of stimulating discussions with co-workers. She and others who chimed in were told that if an employee or visitor complained, that such items must be taken down, including even a group photo of the local NFL cheerleaders. When she protested that she had a right of free speech, the head of HR said "Your speech is yours, but the walls belong to the company."
Freedom is Speech is a 1st Amendment right, but not unlimited, from treason to "yelling fire in a theater" to the army to prisons to students in school. Employees are at once workers and representatives of their employer. There is much case law supporting limits on speech. Sorry, Alt-Wrongers, but the workplace is not 4chan. It is private property, owned by companies that may disagree with you. SCOTUS rulings that apply to Hobby Lobby also apply to LeftyLiberal Inc.
At one point though, a woman PhD chemist asked about signs and posters. She described how she would often post articles she found provocative even if she disagreed with them as a way of stimulating discussions with co-workers. She and others who chimed in were told that if an employee or visitor complained, that such items must be taken down, including even a group photo of the local NFL cheerleaders. When she protested that she had a right of free speech, the head of HR said "Your speech is yours, but the walls belong to the company."
Freedom is Speech is a 1st Amendment right, but not unlimited, from treason to "yelling fire in a theater" to the army to prisons to students in school. Employees are at once workers and representatives of their employer. There is much case law supporting limits on speech. Sorry, Alt-Wrongers, but the workplace is not 4chan. It is private property, owned by companies that may disagree with you. SCOTUS rulings that apply to Hobby Lobby also apply to LeftyLiberal Inc.
3
Please, all Conservatives and Alt Right anti-science enthusiasts, turn your laptops, cell phones and other electronic devices in on your way out the door. The telegraph was good enough for your great grandparents, and it's good enough for you now.
What started this domino stupidity? Well young girls parents who gave their daughters dolls and baking toys as gifts that made them prone to adopt a traditional woman's role later in life while young boys received G.I. Joe dolls and toy guns, and erector sets, and tools. That's why not many women take careers in engineering. Am I sexist? Heck no, American parents are and that's just a fact of life that has been with humanity for thousands of years. Is it a liberal or right wing idea? No, it's reality, something that America has lost sight of. So what if there are few female engineers? They make great teachers, accountants, management and assistants, wives and child bearers. Some get married, others don't. Who cares? I don't. That some Google engineer wrote a ten page manifesto about woman on the job shows the engineer who went to such great lengths over a simple reality, shows he is just a disgruntled misfit who can't get along with others and desperately needs to express his views in abnormal ways. That reminds me; I think I wrote enough. On to the next article.
So what if there are few female engineers? The world is becoming more and more competitive in STEM and we need all the women we can get.
Women are entering these fields increasingly as they are in other advanced nations. More women are completing college than men. There is no scientific basis that women are worse at math and science than men. If our ignorant beliefs, cultural biases are left unchecked, the country fails on the global stage.
Which is already happening. Over 60% of Americans can't find North Korea on the map but think we should take "military action".
We are falling so far behind in critical thinking and education it boggles the mind.
Women are entering these fields increasingly as they are in other advanced nations. More women are completing college than men. There is no scientific basis that women are worse at math and science than men. If our ignorant beliefs, cultural biases are left unchecked, the country fails on the global stage.
Which is already happening. Over 60% of Americans can't find North Korea on the map but think we should take "military action".
We are falling so far behind in critical thinking and education it boggles the mind.
2
People keep calling this the "alt-right", which makes no sense. It's not alternate anything, this is simply normal conservatives voicing their opinions and looking for a venue that isn't trying to censor free speech. Most people who are conservative have nothing to do with the racism. People like Ann Coulter are not racist, they simply know the facts that the left choose to ignore regarding poverty and how the democrats have caused the poverty in minorities we see today. The New Deal was rotten, and so is "A Better Deal." We didn't vote for Trump because we like Trump. We voted for Trump because he claimed he wasn't Hillary. That's it. That's why he's President, because America couldn't stomach another Clinton. And tech companies pandering to those who refuse to accept biological facts regarding boys and girls, that is encoded in your DNA, forcing children to accept such a lie, is abhorrent and is child abuse.
2
White supremacists are racists. They fall under alt-right. Did you read the article? The employee that was fired fell under the sexist column (yet another glowing quality of this disgusting movement), but they widened the scope of grievances to include all kinds of incidents. I'm more upset that we've come up with a PR-friendly term for hate and fearmongerors. "Alt-right"? What a cute little way of saying "bigot".
3
Exactly, it's not sexist or racist to believe women and blacks are inferior if they really are inferior!
What "biological facts" are you referring to?
For those who think he shouldn't have been fired, I suggest going out and overtly breaking the rules of your employer and see how you fare.
7
The rules are different for the AltRight ... they are victims.
1
Milo Yiannopoulos, the alt-right provocateur, called Mr. Damore’s firing “disgusting” in a Facebook post,
My mother used to call things that she didn't like disgusting as well. Funny, I never thought of her as a provocateur. A tea-totaler and a prude, maybe, but never a flame thrower. Some people in this world really know how to hype themselves for their own gain, often to the detriment of what other honest normal people who think along the same lines who aren't about to encumber other people with their chest beating.
My mother used to call things that she didn't like disgusting as well. Funny, I never thought of her as a provocateur. A tea-totaler and a prude, maybe, but never a flame thrower. Some people in this world really know how to hype themselves for their own gain, often to the detriment of what other honest normal people who think along the same lines who aren't about to encumber other people with their chest beating.
The fact that the Microsofts, Googles, Facebooks, and Teslas of the world weren't created by those with Racist-Right (I refuse to indulge the 'political correctness' of "Alt-Right") biased minds is reflective of fact that such behavioral biases are, in turn, reflective of a cognitive deficit.
The Racist-Right mind is incapable of original, world-changing, creative thought that benefits humankind; It seems only capable of coming in after the fact, attempting to capitalize on, copy, claim or otherwise exploit -- and ultimately destroy -- what better minds and more noble beings have wrought.
Exhibit A: Hat[e]treon, et. al..
The Racist-Right mind is incapable of original, world-changing, creative thought that benefits humankind; It seems only capable of coming in after the fact, attempting to capitalize on, copy, claim or otherwise exploit -- and ultimately destroy -- what better minds and more noble beings have wrought.
Exhibit A: Hat[e]treon, et. al..
1
What a bunch of tender snowflakes the so-called "alt-right" turns out to be. Boycotts? LOL, please by all means yes boycott...if you need a search engine or soc-med platform, I'm sure Putin's FSB will be glad to set on up for you.
4
If Hobby Lobby can have religious beliefs why can't Facebook or Google have political beliefs? When did rugged individualists become such whinny little babies?
106
Whiney little baby? Sounds like trump and his culture of victimization has infected the AltRight. Poor Baby.
1
He didn't say they couldn't, he simply pointed out why what felt was bad policy was, in his eyes, not working. The side I see trying to shut down dissenting opinion is not the Alt Right, it is protesters at Middlebury and Berkeley and Evergreen State ... and now Google.
1
So, it's OK for, say, Hobby Lobby or Chick-fil-a to infuse its corporate culture with conservative and religious values but when Silicon Valley does it, it's political correctness run amok.
The alt right railing about PC in places like San Francisco is about as news worthy as a plane landing at Newark. Given that these liberal bastions are doing what conservative parts of the country cannot do-namely, create high paying, in demand jobs- then the complaints should be ignored.
But, never under estimate the power of white grievance and victimhood.
The alt right railing about PC in places like San Francisco is about as news worthy as a plane landing at Newark. Given that these liberal bastions are doing what conservative parts of the country cannot do-namely, create high paying, in demand jobs- then the complaints should be ignored.
But, never under estimate the power of white grievance and victimhood.
7
I'd be interested to know which alt-right group recruited this fellow to be the face of their latest salvo against the modern age.
What's wrong with company leaders proactively pursuing the business and social values they believe in? I see a long history (going back to the beginnings of capitalism) of corporations both doing and defending just such values. The difference (and practically, the only difference) is that modern tech companies are pursuing their liberal values. Business and political conservatives never complained about companies pursuing conservative economic and social values in managing their companies in the long history of capitalism.
3
Good. The alt-right has gotten a totally gratis pass for far too long, & apparently inferred from that that they can do anybloodydangthing they want with impunity & not have to answer for it. The sooner & harder the slapdown on them the better, & that goes double for blowback from any enemies they make. The more wet mops they get in the face, & the sooner, then definitely the better.
1
The Alt right is an intellectual dumpster. So was Nazism. Let us take heed from the lessons of history.
9
My uncle had to attend "classes" in concentration camp to prove Hitler's racial superiority model. He was part of the control group, perfect Aryan specimen from Norway, handpicked by the Fueher at the University of Oslo when he occupied Norway.
He came out 70 pounds. Now 99, perfect health.
Hitler is in the dumpster, my uncle speaks many languages fluently and has a kind and loving heart, not to speak of his brilliant mind.
I really like your post. Thank you.
He came out 70 pounds. Now 99, perfect health.
Hitler is in the dumpster, my uncle speaks many languages fluently and has a kind and loving heart, not to speak of his brilliant mind.
I really like your post. Thank you.
2
I worry that these "people" are our SA.
1
Of course there is a liberal bias to Silicon Valley. Where ever you find scientific inquiry, invention, rational thought and a firm grasp of mathematics you find a classically liberal bias.
Now, if you are looking for theocrats who scorn science and math and believe fervently in the right of morons to rule the lives of others, you can proceed to the conservative locales in the country.
Now, if you are looking for theocrats who scorn science and math and believe fervently in the right of morons to rule the lives of others, you can proceed to the conservative locales in the country.
7
The alt.right is complaining that while they are permitted to run any number of fake news outlets ranging from Breitbart to PJ media, Newsmax, etc., they are being prevented from hostile takeover of all social media? Such a pity.
The weaponized bots and other fraudulent opinion engines that the fringe right ran augmented by Russian cozy bear operations perverted our democracy, and have placed a dangerous idiot at the helm.
We are truly suffering the tyranny of a fringe minority right now and they are joined by an even more select minority of Robert Mercers, Peter Theils, and Koch Brothers along with the likes of Erik Prince to make this an insufferable world.
The weaponized bots and other fraudulent opinion engines that the fringe right ran augmented by Russian cozy bear operations perverted our democracy, and have placed a dangerous idiot at the helm.
We are truly suffering the tyranny of a fringe minority right now and they are joined by an even more select minority of Robert Mercers, Peter Theils, and Koch Brothers along with the likes of Erik Prince to make this an insufferable world.
3
Boo-Hoo to the alt-right. They are so offended, how sad.
Hey alt-right: Stop whining and start your own tech firms. You can find tutorials on You Tube......oh, wait.
Hey alt-right: Stop whining and start your own tech firms. You can find tutorials on You Tube......oh, wait.
5
What a bunch of snowflakes whining about censorship.
4
Dear NY Times, stop calling them Alt-Right. They are racists, bigots and, in many cases, fascists. Stop legitimizing them with made-up political language. Start calling a spade a spade.
5
When corporations distort and corrupt our political system with dark money campaign contributions, as protected by the Supreme Court's Citizen United decision, we rightly denounce the plutocrats running the corporations as evil. But when these same 1%'ers in Silicon Valley use their corporate might to smack down an individual employee for expressing his thoughts, hordes of NYT commenters rally around Google and vigorously defend its right to damn well do whatever it wants to do. Is this a parallel universe where fan clubs made up of progressives cheer on the corporation and condemn the individual? And, that bizarreness notwithstanding, as an additional fillip, we get to read that anyone that dares to take a view opposing the corporation is now lumped in with white-supremacists, fascists and Nazis.
3
How are those two examples related at all? Firing an employee because they put out a memo that doesn't align with corporate views != using money and power to gain leverage over the whole country. Confused as to why you even tried to make that comparison
The alt right represents everything that is wrong in America and beyond. Why not call them what they are? Nazis. Hope Silicon Valley, Google, Apple, Facebook squashes them.
2
The "alt-right" Republican party shills are whining again. That's not news.
The fool in question has not lost his right to "free speech" and Google has not lost its rights as private corporation.
His legal case is a weak as his intellectual case for his views.
The fool in question has not lost his right to "free speech" and Google has not lost its rights as private corporation.
His legal case is a weak as his intellectual case for his views.
I hope they do censor them. Alt-right can slink back to its precious little anonymous chatrooms and take all their dumb memes and conspiracies with them. Enough of this trash...
Stop calling it the alt-right and try out descriptors that actually fit: bigoted, fascist, militant. Lots of adjectives for these hateful voices
2
Delete their accounts. Let them use pony express. WHITE horses, of course.
4
giggles continues to show its diversity is a lacking commodity.
1
Please stop calling these racists alt- anything. They are bigots. They are wrong-headed and they are fleas on our collective moral stability.
Stop calling them "alt-right". Call them what they really are -- white nationalists, white supremacists, neo-nazis, KKK sympathizers, misogynists, racists, xenophobes, homophobes, bigots, haters. Using the term "alt-right" confers legitimacy on a decidedly illegitimate wannabe movement. Have you not learned from all the fawning early coverage of the grifter in chief?
Lets just hope there are more socially progressive hackers out there to to hack and crash these neo-nazi sites.
1
What the NYT refuses to admit is that smear-masters David Brock and Sid Blumenthal, funded by George Soros, Google, Facebook, Twitter, and other leftist and left-leaning dupes, have been relentlessly smearing anyone who disagrees with them since 2008.
Read "The Smear" by Sharyl Attkisson if you want to hear more facts about the Goebbels-minded propaganda machine of the Left.
Read "The Smear" by Sharyl Attkisson if you want to hear more facts about the Goebbels-minded propaganda machine of the Left.
4
If what you say is true, where are the libel and defamation lawsuits?
so what? why are they not supposed to be allowed to have the right to whatever belief they want? aren't corporations people too? if not then we damned well better be going after the Koch Brothers, Eric Prince and their ilk.
Maybe these fools should come up with a theme song. I'm thinking, "All you Need is Hate" in tune with John Lennon's "All You Need is Love."
C'mon now, sing along: "Hate, hate, hate......Hate, hate, hate.....Hate is all you need.
C'mon now, sing along: "Hate, hate, hate......Hate, hate, hate.....Hate is all you need.
1
First we had Generation X, then Generation Y. Now we have James Damore, whose generation clearly should be called Generation Waaaahhhhh!!!!
This is the very threat facing the Ds in Congress and this country; the alt-right internet trolls trying to make their alt-right exremist views (yes I am saying extremist views) main stream through all means internet; including this article and the mere publication of the issue. The alt-right will now use the NYT to 'normalize' and 'mainstream' their baseless hate filled, anti-semetic, racial, and overly incendiary comments contained in this article!
The Rs and Ds are in trouble around the country if this David Dukesque hate speach and suppression of real value and norms are not defended at all costs! Mercer, Yanni, Bannon, and all the others fueling this garbage talk with their 'Citizens United' dollars are an existential threat to the essessence of our country. Trump is merely the tip of the iceberg! Apparently, unless something is seriously done to counter this fire of alt right, we will merely be the chairs on the Titanic.
The Rs and Ds are in trouble around the country if this David Dukesque hate speach and suppression of real value and norms are not defended at all costs! Mercer, Yanni, Bannon, and all the others fueling this garbage talk with their 'Citizens United' dollars are an existential threat to the essessence of our country. Trump is merely the tip of the iceberg! Apparently, unless something is seriously done to counter this fire of alt right, we will merely be the chairs on the Titanic.
This is idiotic. A company can't censor anything. Where were these guys when Reader's Digest and Richard Schiff were checking employees library records for left-leaning literature? Rubbing their hands with glee, that's where. The most important point is that insisting that an idea is just plain wrong, and toxic to a company's fortunes, is not in any way censorship - it is an exercise of judgement. I have judged most conservaitve "ideas" to be a craven wish list authorizing greed and its right hand men (gender deliberate), sexism and racism. None of it comes from scholarship or science. Prejudice is pre-judging. But I have looked first, and so has Google.
4
Always felt insulated from the likes of the alt. right, neo-Nazis, etc. Not anymore! Trump and Co. has brought them out of the woodwork with the vengeance; they are well-funded, destructive and dangerous. I wonder if this Trumpian-induced nightmare will ever end. Worried American.
4
As a red state resident, I can say they've been around for a few years, in various guises. I agree with you that they are well-funded - more than ever -, and destructive, and dangerous.
Well, I hate to admit it, but I'm 73 years old and don't know what Alt-Right means other than some drone wants a special name for their "cause".
If you take Alt-Right, mix it with Alt-Left then what do you get?
Alt-Anus.
That pretty much defines Alt-Right from my perspective.
Anyone claiming to be Alt-Left?
Anyone or anything claiming to be Alt-anything should look up "stupid" as well as "ignorant" in the dictionary.
If you take Alt-Right, mix it with Alt-Left then what do you get?
Alt-Anus.
That pretty much defines Alt-Right from my perspective.
Anyone claiming to be Alt-Left?
Anyone or anything claiming to be Alt-anything should look up "stupid" as well as "ignorant" in the dictionary.
1
wow, what a fight. Lunatic Fringe vs Bro-culture, and hypocrites abound . hope they destroy each other.
1
When I was in high school, I was subjected to bullying and verbal attacks. Why? Because I was smart. Something about that really offended a lot of my classmates. I didn't brag about it, I kept a low profile, but the truth was I was smart. And they attacked me for it. Physically. Why? Because I would create a great product they could use? Because I could be their doctor? Why? Why does the "alt-right" attack all things intellectual, why do they attract scientists, teachers?
For exactly the Republican Party attacked the ACA. For the same reason Trump attacks everyone.
If you have no good ideas that will advance the course of human history. If you are a racist, anti-semite, misyoginist, hateful person and have nothing positive to offer. ATTACK!!
7 years, 60 some bills, thousands of hours of wasted time while the NYC Subway crumbles, the DC Metro melts down, and nothing happens to improve our federal infrastructure, the Republicans had the time to shoot down the ACA.
The result: A colossal, unprecedented failure. The Republicans have NOTHING for the American people. They are a sick, militaristic, empty party. They have to go.
And it starts in 2018. Godspeed, USA.
For exactly the Republican Party attacked the ACA. For the same reason Trump attacks everyone.
If you have no good ideas that will advance the course of human history. If you are a racist, anti-semite, misyoginist, hateful person and have nothing positive to offer. ATTACK!!
7 years, 60 some bills, thousands of hours of wasted time while the NYC Subway crumbles, the DC Metro melts down, and nothing happens to improve our federal infrastructure, the Republicans had the time to shoot down the ACA.
The result: A colossal, unprecedented failure. The Republicans have NOTHING for the American people. They are a sick, militaristic, empty party. They have to go.
And it starts in 2018. Godspeed, USA.
5
The answer to your "why?" is because they know that intelligent people see through them and their anti-intellectual nonsense.
Ah. I see the alt-aggrieved has its whitey-tighties in a bunch. Again.
Wait until they find out the tech industry believes in science.
Wait until they find out the tech industry believes in science.
5
Perhaps the Alt-Right should be directing their efforts elsewhere --
From the Hollywood Reporter, 2011
TV Executives Admit in Taped Interviews That Hollywood Pushes a Liberal Agenda
In clips that will hit the Internet to promote a new book, producers including "Friends" co-creator Marta Kauffman and "House" creator David Shore say Hollywood discriminates against and belittles conservatives.
...
Friends co-creator Marta Kauffman says that when she cast Candace Gingrich-Jones, half-sister of Republican former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, as the minister of a lesbian wedding, “There was a bit of "FU" in it to the right wing.”
Kauffman also acknowledges she “put together a staff of mostly liberal people,” which is another major point of Shapiro’s book: that conservatives aren’t welcome in Hollywood.
...Vin Di Bona, who created America’s Funniest Home Videos, becoming remarkably blunt about his approval of a lack of political diversity in Hollywood. When Shapiro asks what he thinks of conservative critics who say everyone in Hollywood is liberal, Di Bona responds: “I think it’s probably accurate, and I’m happy about it.”
Another video has Leonard Goldberg — who executive produces Blue Bloods for CBS...saying that liberalism in the TV industry is “100 percent dominant, and anyone who denies it is not telling the truth.”
Asked if politics are a barrier to entry. “Absolutely,” Goldberg says.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/tv-executives-admit-taped-intervie...
From the Hollywood Reporter, 2011
TV Executives Admit in Taped Interviews That Hollywood Pushes a Liberal Agenda
In clips that will hit the Internet to promote a new book, producers including "Friends" co-creator Marta Kauffman and "House" creator David Shore say Hollywood discriminates against and belittles conservatives.
...
Friends co-creator Marta Kauffman says that when she cast Candace Gingrich-Jones, half-sister of Republican former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, as the minister of a lesbian wedding, “There was a bit of "FU" in it to the right wing.”
Kauffman also acknowledges she “put together a staff of mostly liberal people,” which is another major point of Shapiro’s book: that conservatives aren’t welcome in Hollywood.
...Vin Di Bona, who created America’s Funniest Home Videos, becoming remarkably blunt about his approval of a lack of political diversity in Hollywood. When Shapiro asks what he thinks of conservative critics who say everyone in Hollywood is liberal, Di Bona responds: “I think it’s probably accurate, and I’m happy about it.”
Another video has Leonard Goldberg — who executive produces Blue Bloods for CBS...saying that liberalism in the TV industry is “100 percent dominant, and anyone who denies it is not telling the truth.”
Asked if politics are a barrier to entry. “Absolutely,” Goldberg says.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/tv-executives-admit-taped-intervie...
Last time I checked, "Hollywood" wasn't the government and can hire anyone it likes.
Milo Yiannopoulos...calling something "disgusting" is beyond bizarrely ironic. This coming from a man who laughs about adult males sexually abusing young boys and implicitly condones such behavior. Just how strange and unhinged is today's right-wing becoming?
5
Clod who can't master the art of office politics writes memo with a few vaguely good points buried in poor writing and strident self-pity; gets fired because nobody wants to slow down their work day to deal with a jerk.
Why is this news?
Why is this news?
5
The fundamental hypocrisy of the ALT-RIGHT is that they *demand* that their views be respected while showing nothing but contempt for everyone else's views.
Sorry, pumpkins. It's time for you to grow up now. You can't just stamp your feet and demand respect, you have to earn it!
If you think you poor dears are so darn oppressed, go make your case early and often for 20 or 30 years, until you get people to agree with you. It's what the Black community did in the Civil Rights Era. It's what the Gays and Lesbians did 30 years later.
Sure it takes decades, but if your cause is just, eventually people will support it.
From my point of view, having paid my dues in the LGBT civil rights struggle, I think the ALT-Right is absolutely deplorable and doesn't have a hope in hell of earning the respect they crave.
Why? They are demanding that we respect their "right" to abuse others. In that sense, they occupy the same moral low ground that NAMBLA and people who organize dog fights do.
The desire to be left alone and be treated fairly is universal. I'm not transgender but I sympathize with their struggle and their desires.
But the desire to be abusive is not universal. I don't relate to that fetish and I do NOT sympathize with people afflicted by it. I sympathize with the people they abuse.
So the alt-right is going to have a hard time winning people over.
Sorry, pumpkins. It's time for you to grow up now. You can't just stamp your feet and demand respect, you have to earn it!
If you think you poor dears are so darn oppressed, go make your case early and often for 20 or 30 years, until you get people to agree with you. It's what the Black community did in the Civil Rights Era. It's what the Gays and Lesbians did 30 years later.
Sure it takes decades, but if your cause is just, eventually people will support it.
From my point of view, having paid my dues in the LGBT civil rights struggle, I think the ALT-Right is absolutely deplorable and doesn't have a hope in hell of earning the respect they crave.
Why? They are demanding that we respect their "right" to abuse others. In that sense, they occupy the same moral low ground that NAMBLA and people who organize dog fights do.
The desire to be left alone and be treated fairly is universal. I'm not transgender but I sympathize with their struggle and their desires.
But the desire to be abusive is not universal. I don't relate to that fetish and I do NOT sympathize with people afflicted by it. I sympathize with the people they abuse.
So the alt-right is going to have a hard time winning people over.
6
Look at who are "snowflakes" now.
6
Hate speech is forbidden in Europe. Simple. No discussion after a narcistic, egotistical guy with a weird haircut whipped up a frenzy using inflammatory hate speech agains minorities and immigrants to start a world war and a genocide.
2
The alt-right has caught itself in a hypocritical Catch 22. If they don't like the handling of news by the "left wing" companies in Silicon Valley, then start their own media companies. Oh, I'd agree that they are in a tough position to do that with the virtual monopolies of companies like Facebook and Twitter. But then they are in favor of their self serving version of "free trade" which means that companies can do whatever they want that is marginally legal including become monopolies. We have anti-trust laws, but the alt-right has fought tooth and nail to make sure that monopolies are never limited nor broken up.
Have at it alt-right. Create your own versions of Mugbook and Cock-a-doodle-do and exercise your own versions of free speech on your media outlets.
Have at it alt-right. Create your own versions of Mugbook and Cock-a-doodle-do and exercise your own versions of free speech on your media outlets.
3
So, let me get this straight: a political movement based on misogyny, white supremacy, racism, bigotry, denial of science, denial of facts, obfuscation of the truth, information control and dissemination of fake propaganda for the masses is complaining because it doesn't get "treated fairly"?
Well, this is a new definition of hypocrisy! The alt-righters can rot in their own steaming fumes of lies and disinformation in the putrid swamps where they and their ideas belong. They do not deserve any sympathy, nor do they deserve to be heard. If Silicon Valley shuts their voices out altogether, the better.
Well, this is a new definition of hypocrisy! The alt-righters can rot in their own steaming fumes of lies and disinformation in the putrid swamps where they and their ideas belong. They do not deserve any sympathy, nor do they deserve to be heard. If Silicon Valley shuts their voices out altogether, the better.
127
This is rich. The alt-right that defends their hate through the 1st Amendment is chastising a corporation (they are now people remember) for expressing their rights as a corporation? They own the internet hate nodes. Well, they are accepted by the President, so not surprising.
4
Um, last I checked Google was an American company, yes? Companies have no laws of operation, they can (and do) hire and fire anyone, for any reason.
On this coast, the corporate hire is slanted to the Right by quite a bit (this is an assertion based on personal observation over many years). I would call this yin to their yang. "Guess what flyovers, on the East coast other than DC, it can be found that most of corporate America is full of Right Wing drones. So shut your mouths about the unfairness on the Left coast."
On this coast, the corporate hire is slanted to the Right by quite a bit (this is an assertion based on personal observation over many years). I would call this yin to their yang. "Guess what flyovers, on the East coast other than DC, it can be found that most of corporate America is full of Right Wing drones. So shut your mouths about the unfairness on the Left coast."
3
This echo chamber we live in needs a good house cleaning.
It is way past time for Facebook and Twitter to use only verified users who use their real names. The most inflammatory comments always seem to come from those that hide behind a questionable profile.
Commentators should be verified on every platform
It is way past time for Facebook and Twitter to use only verified users who use their real names. The most inflammatory comments always seem to come from those that hide behind a questionable profile.
Commentators should be verified on every platform
1
I couldn't disagree more.
It's precisely guaranteed anonymity that allows citizens to write about their own opinions in public WITHOUT risking to be fired, and as much as I support the firing of Damore (you can't start publicly writing 10-pages documents promoting ideas that science has debunked long ago already, and want to work for a company that has "science" as one of its core values and brand image strengths), he is floating opinions that today even the US president seems to share.
And the only way to defeat opinions based on proven falsehoods, in a democracy, is to have real, respectful debates among people who disagree.
The worst thing that could happen is that certain people feel so threatened because of what they believe in, that they start shutting up and continuing to vote for Trump anyhow.
The only way to create a thriving democracy is to have a free, open society, where opinions can be debated as ideas, rather than linked to one or the other individual, who can then be socially sanctioned if his opinions are the most popular ones at a certain moment in time.
Conclusion: opinions based on debunked ideas exist, and the best way to show people why they're wrong is to attack those opinions, NOT the person believing in it.
It's precisely guaranteed anonymity that allows citizens to write about their own opinions in public WITHOUT risking to be fired, and as much as I support the firing of Damore (you can't start publicly writing 10-pages documents promoting ideas that science has debunked long ago already, and want to work for a company that has "science" as one of its core values and brand image strengths), he is floating opinions that today even the US president seems to share.
And the only way to defeat opinions based on proven falsehoods, in a democracy, is to have real, respectful debates among people who disagree.
The worst thing that could happen is that certain people feel so threatened because of what they believe in, that they start shutting up and continuing to vote for Trump anyhow.
The only way to create a thriving democracy is to have a free, open society, where opinions can be debated as ideas, rather than linked to one or the other individual, who can then be socially sanctioned if his opinions are the most popular ones at a certain moment in time.
Conclusion: opinions based on debunked ideas exist, and the best way to show people why they're wrong is to attack those opinions, NOT the person believing in it.
1
The Times could benefit from that rule as well.
The woes of human history are essentially caused by alpha male behavior - war, murder, rape, bullying repeat. It's endless. Now we're living in the age of alpha male clowns. Boring beyond belief.
5
The refrain in these comments is "free speech can have consequences". Hmm, wonder how many of these same people rail on about Colin Kaepernick's unemployment from pro football.
It's like everything else here: "do as I say, not as I do".
The "other side's" point of view is always flawed, but amazingly, "our" point of view has qualifications and justifications, even when nearly identical.
It's like everything else here: "do as I say, not as I do".
The "other side's" point of view is always flawed, but amazingly, "our" point of view has qualifications and justifications, even when nearly identical.
3
Except that there's something called "science", remember?
You go to a doctor because you know he'll use evidence-based medicine.
In the same way, certain opinions are based on scientifically proven facts, whereas others are based on debunked falsehood. That's NOT the same thing. And it's not because today the GOP seems to have lost confidence in the power of its own conservative philosophy to convince people to vote for them, and as a consequence, starts to become afraid of science and proven facts and to prefer lying in the hope that that will allow them to keep their jobs, whereas Democrats clearly don't need to do so, that all of a sudden science itself has become "liberal".
Damore wants to work for a private sector business that build his brand image and the strength of its products on scientific innovation. In that case, it's not a could idea to go public with a 10 page document that is mainly based on proven falsehoods, because that weakens the brand image its managing board decided to cultivate. When you do so, as an employee, you're fired.
As to Kaepernick: he was a celebrity using his public status to protest against discrimination. National football is supposed to support equality, so there was no conflict of "philosophies" between boss and employee here. There was only discussion about whether protests on the job are appropriate or not. So that's a totally different debate.
You go to a doctor because you know he'll use evidence-based medicine.
In the same way, certain opinions are based on scientifically proven facts, whereas others are based on debunked falsehood. That's NOT the same thing. And it's not because today the GOP seems to have lost confidence in the power of its own conservative philosophy to convince people to vote for them, and as a consequence, starts to become afraid of science and proven facts and to prefer lying in the hope that that will allow them to keep their jobs, whereas Democrats clearly don't need to do so, that all of a sudden science itself has become "liberal".
Damore wants to work for a private sector business that build his brand image and the strength of its products on scientific innovation. In that case, it's not a could idea to go public with a 10 page document that is mainly based on proven falsehoods, because that weakens the brand image its managing board decided to cultivate. When you do so, as an employee, you're fired.
As to Kaepernick: he was a celebrity using his public status to protest against discrimination. National football is supposed to support equality, so there was no conflict of "philosophies" between boss and employee here. There was only discussion about whether protests on the job are appropriate or not. So that's a totally different debate.
1
Certain segments of society hold the conviction that free speech is only acceptable if it mirrors their ideology or beliefs.
If it doesn't, they call you names and try to censor you.
If it doesn't, they call you names and try to censor you.
1
I read the memo- it wasn't ridiculous and the guy even said he was a liberal. There are biological differences between men and women although I didn't agree with all his conclusions. Still there was NO reason to fire him. Had he sent out a manifesto praising transgender people they would have promoted him. There is a cleat liberal bias and I love that it's being exposed for the stupid ideology that it is.
2
He lost his job because he openly questioned his co-workers abilities, and undermined respect for them in the workplace (albeit in an underhanded, generic way}. He believes that biological qualities he attributes to women are not useful in the software engineering environment. It's not true, it's not appropriate, and reflects an inflexible attitude towards any kind of change in the workplace. Software engineering is a team effort. How do you work with someone with these stated predjudices?
3
Google doesn't need "a reason to fire him." It can fire anybody it likes.
1
It's as if we're drowning in 'unreality'! How does one debate those that will not accept objective reality?
Their language is that of absurdity and 'Bizarro World': "Reverse Racism"; "Taxes are Slavery"; "War on Christmas"' "You're being intolerant of my intolerance."; "The Civil War was not about racism/slavery."; "We're being oppressed and stifled!" says the rich white kids, that went to expensive private schools, and mostly live on family wealth.
And when challenged in their irrational views they shout 'Fake News'; 'Liberal bias'; etc.
How to avoid engaging fools, when they have the levers of Government?
Their language is that of absurdity and 'Bizarro World': "Reverse Racism"; "Taxes are Slavery"; "War on Christmas"' "You're being intolerant of my intolerance."; "The Civil War was not about racism/slavery."; "We're being oppressed and stifled!" says the rich white kids, that went to expensive private schools, and mostly live on family wealth.
And when challenged in their irrational views they shout 'Fake News'; 'Liberal bias'; etc.
How to avoid engaging fools, when they have the levers of Government?
2
You have the right to say anything you like in the workplace. To my embarrassment, several times in my career my mouth ran away with itself. While the repercussions were not severe, the corporate message was clear: you do not have a right to act like a jerk on the company's time or dime.
I imaging Google is an "at-will" employer. They have the right to terminate you at any time for any reason or no reason at all. Grow up, people.
I imaging Google is an "at-will" employer. They have the right to terminate you at any time for any reason or no reason at all. Grow up, people.
1
Bravo to all of these companies for standing up to those who espouse hate. Taking extremist, fundamentalist positions that delegitimize other humans doesn't entitle you to fair treatment from companies with a shred of decency.
1
It's very interesting that when companies are lauded for sticking to their guns over religious values --- Hobby Lobby and Chick Fil A come to mind -- the same forces are rallied to attack other entities because THEIR inherent values run counter to the Alt Right maelstrom. Complain because a company wants to avoid helping someone who is opposed to plurality and equality? Unthinkable!
The next thing you know, we'll be asked to extend equal rights to minorities and bake birthday cakes for gay couples.
The next thing you know, we'll be asked to extend equal rights to minorities and bake birthday cakes for gay couples.
2
In the past, newspapers did not have to publsh their screeds, and private halls did not have to give them a soapbox. So it is today: social media sites are not obliged to give them a megaphone which puts the whole world within earshot. Let them self-segregate into their own little electronic ghettos, the same way they used to hand out leaflets and circulate their nutty newsletters. We'll all be better off for it.
2
The Alt-Right a conservatives have no problem with hate when they claim it's religion based. Let's make liberalism a religion!
When your worldview diminishes "the other," disregards life, science, etc., it's not a "point of view," it's deranged.
How is this just the alt-right? Googles claims to value all voices until it hears one it doesn't like. That person is fired. If the opinions do not fit their feel-good ideas, you get canned. It is not censorship, bit hilariously hypocritical. This is PC liberalism 101 on display.
2
What alt-right is doing is exploiting Google's misstep. In response to an innocuous memo the hapless executives put their feet in their mouths and fired him; if he had gotten a reprimand, all would be quiet on the Western front. But taking his job away because (allegedly) one woman felt angry about the memo... is a gift to alt-right, Trump and the meme that certain Silicon Valley companies are incapable of separating ideology from business.
Google seems to be stepping ever deeper into the mud. What I see is an atrocious PR department and incompetent management. The appropriate step would be to rehire Damore and apologize to him. But also make it clear that writing provocative memos might not always be good use of company time.
Google seems to be stepping ever deeper into the mud. What I see is an atrocious PR department and incompetent management. The appropriate step would be to rehire Damore and apologize to him. But also make it clear that writing provocative memos might not always be good use of company time.
I think he wanted to be fired. He's loving the attention.
1
The easy thing Google could have done is have a symposium to talk about it, Right? Ah, but then their policy of female exclusion through the paycheck would have come out full force. It seems that male-dominated Silicone Valley doesn't care what women think about their pay. They'll just try and get away with it as long as possible. I wonder how Sheryl Sandberg feels about all of this? I have a feeling she's a CEO before she's a woman.
>80% of Computer Science and Engineering majors are men, who go found tech companies and pick employees that look like themselves. That is why there are so many men in tech, not because women are genetically incapable. Shouldn't we just encourage women to study STEM?
41
Yes. From kindergarten.
1
Why don't we just encourage women to study what they want to study? There's clearly a reason that girls aren't going down this path and sexism might be a very small reason for it, but very small. Right now women are 33% more likely than men to earn a college degree. Why is that? I don't know exactly why, no one could definitively say why. But one thing I'm sure of, no one at google or any tech company or any NGO has created a task force to try and correct that problem.
2
Many articles and comments about the manifesto, fail to note that nowhere in the many pages does the author make any correlation between the qualities that he is describing and the skills required in a highly diversified tech company like Google. If he had said "some people are taller than others" - you'd want to know what that had to do with working in IT. Ditto the contents of his 10-pager. Without some analysis of what the skill set is, no statement of the theoretic differences between X and Y has any meaning.
I haven't seen any research that would clarify the ideal skills for tech workers, which would help us assess whether his statements are even relevant. Over 30 years ago, before companies had seasoned programmers to choose from but had to hire and train, some companies selected applicants who had a strong music background. It wasn't exactly clear why, but their experience was that musicians made good programmers. My guess is that it had something to do with the ability to work with complex patterns.
It is also a mistake to assume that there is only one type of IT work. I worked for three decades in computer systems serving the humanities. Few if any of my colleagues had a STEM background, but we did have programmers who were sociologists, linguists, and classicists. Nearby there was a physics research facility whose IT folks had degrees in that subject. The narrow view of Google Guy just showed that he did not understand his own place of work.
I haven't seen any research that would clarify the ideal skills for tech workers, which would help us assess whether his statements are even relevant. Over 30 years ago, before companies had seasoned programmers to choose from but had to hire and train, some companies selected applicants who had a strong music background. It wasn't exactly clear why, but their experience was that musicians made good programmers. My guess is that it had something to do with the ability to work with complex patterns.
It is also a mistake to assume that there is only one type of IT work. I worked for three decades in computer systems serving the humanities. Few if any of my colleagues had a STEM background, but we did have programmers who were sociologists, linguists, and classicists. Nearby there was a physics research facility whose IT folks had degrees in that subject. The narrow view of Google Guy just showed that he did not understand his own place of work.
When I was young I thought we had free speech in this country. The older I get, the more I notice there are thing we can't talk about. This is most obvious when mobs of students break windows in order to keep conservative speakers off college campuses.
2
And the media is right there, helping these folks get the attention they crave.
How many people are really members of this Alt-Right? I suspect not very many. Enough to justify the amount of attention given to them by the press?
You feed the beast. You're not fake news, contrary to what a certain person constantly states on Twitter. And you should be free to cover what you want. But, too many times, you focus on the noise, not the news.
How many people are really members of this Alt-Right? I suspect not very many. Enough to justify the amount of attention given to them by the press?
You feed the beast. You're not fake news, contrary to what a certain person constantly states on Twitter. And you should be free to cover what you want. But, too many times, you focus on the noise, not the news.
2
The dirty little secret that everyone knows and is afraid to repeat is that if you put 100 Google soft ware engineers in a room and 50 of them were men and fifty of them were women, and you tasked them with creating a new program to accomplish some difficult task, the men would create better software about 75 out of 100 times. Those are the facts. Lets have an open discussion. Google just could not handle the truth. Sorry.
1
What, no footnotes to fake studies or pretty charts proving nothing?
You need to step up your game.
You need to step up your game.
6
I humbly suggest you revisit the definition of the words "facts" and "truth."
3
Citation needed. Thanks in advance.
1
Trump Election Lesson #26: If we put "Alt-Right" in a story or headline, people will read it.*
*There is no requirement that any element of the story must have an "Alt-Right" point of view.
*There is no requirement that any element of the story must have an "Alt-Right" point of view.
1
I've read Danmore's screed. The gist of it is that women, as a class, are inferior at technological jobs such as his, and Google, by seeking female employees, is hampering productivity (of men.)
When you read comments about how "well-reasoned" and "thoughtful" he was, that tells you more about the person making the comment than it does about Damore.
When you read comments about how "well-reasoned" and "thoughtful" he was, that tells you more about the person making the comment than it does about Damore.
2
I guess Google is now going to fire Susan Wojciki for expressing her opinions.
Since the Alt-Right seems to be good at two things: resentments and law suits against people and companies they belieed have "wronged" them. Maybe what we need is an Alt-Left movement which is good at job creation and innovation not just complaining. We could call them the Dems or Liberals! By the way Alt-Right a suggestion - you should model yourselves after the character from Rain Man. Raymond had the resentment idea down pat - a note book to write all resentments down so you can focus on them constantly. Or is that what you are using the lawsuits as expensive tax payer and corporate paid for resentment books?
2
Let's cut to the core of the matter. It's idiotic to say that the Alt-right has found a new Enemy. We all know that. This is part of a national conversation we are having about merit vs diversity (affirmative action). What does Silicon Valley value more: diversity or merit? You can either hire for “diversity,” or you can hire for merit, but to the horror of SJW everywhere — you cannot have both.
Although the SCOTUS has never held that all workplaces must be racially or gender balanced, the EEOC has firmly embraced the presumption that the profiles of particular workplaces should reflect the composition of the broader population. The memo and firing have obliterated that idea and brought this hypocrisy into the cold light of day. Thus the liberal hand wringing.
This presumption makes no sense unless people from all groups are equally qualified for positions at all levels only then will every group be represented in each occupation exactly in proportion to its share of the broader population. If members of one group are more qualified for particular positions than others, they will be hired in disproportionately greater numbers; persons from a less qualified group will be under-represented in those jobs.The problem for diversity and equality advocates is that critics of quotas have framed the debate in a way that sets up an irreconcilable tension between the principle of merit & the goal of diversity. It won't work. That's an inconvenient truth that even Google can't solve.
Although the SCOTUS has never held that all workplaces must be racially or gender balanced, the EEOC has firmly embraced the presumption that the profiles of particular workplaces should reflect the composition of the broader population. The memo and firing have obliterated that idea and brought this hypocrisy into the cold light of day. Thus the liberal hand wringing.
This presumption makes no sense unless people from all groups are equally qualified for positions at all levels only then will every group be represented in each occupation exactly in proportion to its share of the broader population. If members of one group are more qualified for particular positions than others, they will be hired in disproportionately greater numbers; persons from a less qualified group will be under-represented in those jobs.The problem for diversity and equality advocates is that critics of quotas have framed the debate in a way that sets up an irreconcilable tension between the principle of merit & the goal of diversity. It won't work. That's an inconvenient truth that even Google can't solve.
2
It is really being biased to be opposed to stupidity. We should cherish it. Trump does.
2
The AltRight hypocrisy- A Conservative business (such as a bakery) can refuse to serve you, but a "Liberal" business can not refuse to serve them.
The alt-right wants the world to return to an idealistic 'Leave It To Beaver' world where there is no colored people and the wife does not work outside the house and serves dinner wearing a dress and pearls. These people live in a fantasy world. And the companies that make money off these really stupid people, (Fox news, Brietbart, ect.) perpetuate the this fantasy for the crass acquisition of money.
1
Pal Pal LOVES alt right speech, Thiel is alt right, that's why I encourage all not to use Pal Pal any longer
The alt-right, or whatever you want to call it, likes to paint this battle as intolerance of conservative ideas. But if those ideas are rooted in intolerance, then of course any thinking adult would oppose them.
If there is a liberal bias in the Silicon Valley, then it's the product of highly educated, successful professionals being smart enough to know that bigoted, narrow-minded viewpoints will only make you bitter, ignorant and stagnant.
If there is a liberal bias in the Silicon Valley, then it's the product of highly educated, successful professionals being smart enough to know that bigoted, narrow-minded viewpoints will only make you bitter, ignorant and stagnant.
1
There was no censorship in the Google case. They fired an at-will employee and he is free to say whatever he wants anywhere but where he is sitting in and using their corporate property.
The alt-right whiners are as phony and hypocritical as ever. They are booted now by power hungry Republican operatives- and fool only themselves.
The alt-right whiners are as phony and hypocritical as ever. They are booted now by power hungry Republican operatives- and fool only themselves.
1
(Even he really thought he was right(?))
What,..He expect to be promoted, a bonus, "Pat on the Back",..for that?
Or he's another one of those "Know It Tallls" that really think they're smarter than everyone else? There's procedures, means, departments,...within organizations if his actual intent was to address an issue.
Check his employment record, schools,..I bet he's authored similar idiotic Manifestos there too:):)
What,..He expect to be promoted, a bonus, "Pat on the Back",..for that?
Or he's another one of those "Know It Tallls" that really think they're smarter than everyone else? There's procedures, means, departments,...within organizations if his actual intent was to address an issue.
Check his employment record, schools,..I bet he's authored similar idiotic Manifestos there too:):)
1
James Damore wasn't fired because of the nature of the opinions that he holds. He was fired for inappropriately spreading those opinions in the workplace. It is a management issue, not a political issue, and Google was correct to take the action that it did. Of course, it is pointless to hope that any on the alt-right would understand, let alone respect, that distinction. The alt-right loves nothing more than to wallow in their own perceived victimhood, and James Damore gives them perfect opportunity to do so.
1
So it's ok for a bakery to refuse to do business with a gay couple wanting a wedding cake, but wrong for a tech company to not do business with the alt-right?
93
Or, I was asking myself the opposite question: it's not okay for a baker to refuse to make a cake based on his beliefs, but it's okay for Google to fire an employee based on the expression of his, with respect to company policy and practice?
1
There are a few instances where "discrimination" is "improper" or at least "unlawful": discrimination on the basis of sex (including sexual orientation), gender, race, national origin. All other "discrimination" is lawful for private companies doing business in the United States. That is the facts, like it or not.
The biggest 2 problems with the Google manifesto is that (1) it presented half-baked pseudoscience as an ideological viewpoint that was rational discussion (the author would have been on better logical grounding if he simply stated that he was presenting his political/personal views), calling into question his competence and professional decision-making, and (2) it held forth on the biological differences of minority employees to support a theory of self-marginalization (which is offensive and off the reservation in any integrated setting), thus humiliating and condescending toward others in the company.
As a left-leaning individual who believes that more conservatives should be included and welcomed in academia, which has become too exclusively left (in my opinion), I see this Google manifesto as pseudoscience rationalization of supremacist thinking. It serves as a counter-argument as to why people who seek the cover of "conservatism" to push their insecurities and supremacy ideals should be welcomed in academic circles.
I see this guy as actually setting back the argument for including those who claim to represent conservative views in advanced academic institutions. His biological theories of inadequacy are no better than those who claim to legitimately argue against climate change, and use bad science to claim a rational ground for what really are gut level belief systems.
As a left-leaning individual who believes that more conservatives should be included and welcomed in academia, which has become too exclusively left (in my opinion), I see this Google manifesto as pseudoscience rationalization of supremacist thinking. It serves as a counter-argument as to why people who seek the cover of "conservatism" to push their insecurities and supremacy ideals should be welcomed in academic circles.
I see this guy as actually setting back the argument for including those who claim to represent conservative views in advanced academic institutions. His biological theories of inadequacy are no better than those who claim to legitimately argue against climate change, and use bad science to claim a rational ground for what really are gut level belief systems.
6
A pox on both your houses. There were many people, including scientists, who did not disagree with every point in the Google memo, which apparently is so dangerous to the public weal, Google doesn't want us reading it. There are also people, including me, who did not disagree with every point in the Google memo, but do not see its existence as a carte blanche to dismiss the rights and/or dignity of women.
The great mass of people are neither alt right or far left and see points to both arguments, even as they get nervous with the extreme contrary outcomes both sides seem to favor.
Google has failed to bring either equality OR EQUITY to minorities and women and this glaring fact is a problem not addressed as two political sides bicker among themselves. Two percent black employees by Google - and I don't want to hear excuses from companies that behave in discriminatory ways even as they mount PR campaigns stating how liberal they are.
Google spent $241 million and has not improved its numbers? Then what they are doing needs to be profoundly rethought. Rethinking does not mean making newsworthy information unavailable or firing dissenting employees, it means listening and trying new outreach, new training, new programs in high schools.
Neither swooning female employees or domineering male ones should be only voices listened to but it appears Google just intends to go on doing whatever it is it does and insisting it is trying very, very hard. That a lie.
The great mass of people are neither alt right or far left and see points to both arguments, even as they get nervous with the extreme contrary outcomes both sides seem to favor.
Google has failed to bring either equality OR EQUITY to minorities and women and this glaring fact is a problem not addressed as two political sides bicker among themselves. Two percent black employees by Google - and I don't want to hear excuses from companies that behave in discriminatory ways even as they mount PR campaigns stating how liberal they are.
Google spent $241 million and has not improved its numbers? Then what they are doing needs to be profoundly rethought. Rethinking does not mean making newsworthy information unavailable or firing dissenting employees, it means listening and trying new outreach, new training, new programs in high schools.
Neither swooning female employees or domineering male ones should be only voices listened to but it appears Google just intends to go on doing whatever it is it does and insisting it is trying very, very hard. That a lie.
27
What is it about "private sector business" that you don't get ... ?
Every managing board has the right to promote the work ethic that they believe will increase profits most, and Google happens to believe in creating a work place culture and a brand image that explicitly rejects what science has proven to be false, on social issues.
Does that mean that it already implemented this culture perfectly? No, of course.
Does it mean that employees have to fully agree with that culture in private life? No.
Does it mean that they don't have the right to express their own opinions on these issues in private conversations with co-workers? No.
Does it mean that an employee does NOT have the right to start a public campaign that goes AGAINST that culture? Yes. It's the managing board that decides the brand image, and if you can't find yourself in your company's brand image and want to change it, no matter what company will fire you, period.
And your argument that the "great mass of people are neither alt right or far left and see points to both arguments, even as they get nervous with the extreme contrary outcomes both sides seem to favor. " would be valid IF Damora was hired as an op-ed writer or pundit, so if he would have been paid to express opinions that are scientifically false (AND that hurt half of the American people, concretely), then firing him would have been unjust. But he was paid to work as an engineer and support the company's image of respecting science...
Every managing board has the right to promote the work ethic that they believe will increase profits most, and Google happens to believe in creating a work place culture and a brand image that explicitly rejects what science has proven to be false, on social issues.
Does that mean that it already implemented this culture perfectly? No, of course.
Does it mean that employees have to fully agree with that culture in private life? No.
Does it mean that they don't have the right to express their own opinions on these issues in private conversations with co-workers? No.
Does it mean that an employee does NOT have the right to start a public campaign that goes AGAINST that culture? Yes. It's the managing board that decides the brand image, and if you can't find yourself in your company's brand image and want to change it, no matter what company will fire you, period.
And your argument that the "great mass of people are neither alt right or far left and see points to both arguments, even as they get nervous with the extreme contrary outcomes both sides seem to favor. " would be valid IF Damora was hired as an op-ed writer or pundit, so if he would have been paid to express opinions that are scientifically false (AND that hurt half of the American people, concretely), then firing him would have been unjust. But he was paid to work as an engineer and support the company's image of respecting science...
2
Actually, Google is trying hard to avoid getting their pants taken off in a lawsuit by the Labor board, because it has strong data which demonstrates that they have actively discriminated against women in terms of promotion and salary.
The average age at Google is 29 years old. Why is it that all diatribes against Google's hiring inequities never mention age?
2
So much for the alt-right pretending in any way, shape or form to be "conservative." One of the mantras of the conservative movement is to "let the market decide." The alt-right seems to want business to conform to its political views. Yes, there is First Amendment free speech guarantee, but as I learned quickly as a journalist, freedom of the press applies only to those who own one, and you can't yell "Fire" in a crowded theater.
4
I worked in the software industry from the early 70s until 2005. I never once saw any expression of political leanings left of right in the work environment from either workers or management. Times have certainly changed, and not always for the better.
4
How about the alt-right just gives up there Netflix, Amazon, Google, Facebook and Twitter then?
No?
If you disagree with their policies, don't use their products. It's still* a free country. If hobby lobby gets to discriminate then silicon valley gets to (try) be inclusive
No?
If you disagree with their policies, don't use their products. It's still* a free country. If hobby lobby gets to discriminate then silicon valley gets to (try) be inclusive
14
Many in the alt-right seems happiest when they are angry so it is no surprise they are always able to find a new enemy. They use tactics and techniques to try to turn every issue or situation into one where they are an aggrieved party. They require special treatment and will whine, bitch, blame and cry in order to call to the worlds attention even the slightest of slights, whether they be real or alt-real.
Using their parlance, while certainly some on the left may act be snowflakes many of these alt-righters truly are such delicate little flowers.
Using their parlance, while certainly some on the left may act be snowflakes many of these alt-righters truly are such delicate little flowers.
7
nice
Just call them the "alte-right," the old right. That'll put them into perspective.
9
So the CEO who fired this employee comes from a third world country with some really retrogressive lines of thinking. Hardly surprising that he would go with the flow, after all, all the years spent being pro-establishment to survive and thrive is unlikely to forgotten easily.
2
Sergey Brin? Because he was born in Russia he's "establishment?"
If that's what it takes to form a wildly-successful company and make a gazillion dollars I totally picked the wrong parents.
If that's what it takes to form a wildly-successful company and make a gazillion dollars I totally picked the wrong parents.
1
The modern Western Civilization is built upon a pervasive liberal bias, so yes; Roger that, haters.
7
No need to look at Silicon Valley for left wing censorship, just read the NYTimes.
Often my comments , which are somewhat conservative, are delayed in publication, often they are grouped with a hundred other comments and thus get " lost in the sauce ". This is a subtle, unprovable but highly suspicious practice.
Often my comments , which are somewhat conservative, are delayed in publication, often they are grouped with a hundred other comments and thus get " lost in the sauce ". This is a subtle, unprovable but highly suspicious practice.
6
Except that there are actual people moderating the comments, who cannot do multiple things at once, and who certainly don't have time to treat your comments differently than everyone else's.
4
No, the same happens to ME. And I'm a " lefty". They need more help within the comments section, period. Way too slow, even highly recommended comments just vanish, many comments appear multiple times, in repeated " blocks". Either do it right, OR just don't do it.
Very frustrating.
Very frustrating.
3
I regularly post comments and respond to commenters with my very liberal opinions, and a lot of what I write does not get published or is delayed.
3
Things get sticky when people try to weaponize free speech. Just like the proverbial "yelling fire in a crowded theater", some speech is deemed unacceptable. The tricky part is deciding when one person's free speech morph's into direct harm to another. So while all speech is protected, it doesn't mean it has to be accepted. The alt-right community has the right to say anything, and conversely the companies have a right to reject it.
7
Wow someone is fired for a point of view that is different than the companies. Scary
4
Why? You're conflating at-will employment with free speech.
Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence, especially when that speech comes in to form of a manifesto based on junk science and junk ideas.
10
Never mind the fact that most of the gobbledygook this guy posted was poorly referenced pseudoscience that suffered from a number of fairly obvious inferential and interpretive errors (and which actually call into serious question his so-called scientific credentials).
But this guy demonstrated incredibly poor judgement, wasting hours of company time and resources to post a personal political opinion that served no direct business purpose, and served to disparage and alienate at least 20% of peers and more than 50% of his company's customers, dry possibly in direct violation of company policy and the law. And talk about poor communication skills - the guy chooses the worst possible forum and format (blast email).
There's not a manager or a business in the world that wouldn't have fired that guy in a heartbeat.
Suddenly white nationalists and conservative apologists have become the whiniest victims around. The hypocrisy would be hilarious if it weren't so revolting
But this guy demonstrated incredibly poor judgement, wasting hours of company time and resources to post a personal political opinion that served no direct business purpose, and served to disparage and alienate at least 20% of peers and more than 50% of his company's customers, dry possibly in direct violation of company policy and the law. And talk about poor communication skills - the guy chooses the worst possible forum and format (blast email).
There's not a manager or a business in the world that wouldn't have fired that guy in a heartbeat.
Suddenly white nationalists and conservative apologists have become the whiniest victims around. The hypocrisy would be hilarious if it weren't so revolting
14
You state "It’s a tech company’s right, of course, to bar whomever it wishes." If that is so, why can't a cake baker or a photographer do the same thing? Especially since these are creative processes and social media is simply an accommodation of 1 and 0's?
4
Because of public accommodations law. It's been around since the 60's. Familiarize yourself.
1
Bigotry isn't an "alternative point of view" ... it's an ugly, corrosive set of beliefs that tears at our social fabric. There are many shades of belief, political and otherwise, outside the mainstream. They should all be heard, but hatred and bigotry should be shunned by rational, patriotic Americans.
7
Why do publications like the Times buy into the jargon propagated by fringe elements? Jargon like "alt-right." There is no such thing. They are right-wing extremists, lunatic fringe conservatives, the fanatical wing of the GOP, Tea Party extremist ideologues -- take your pick. No such thing as "alt-right." In fact, in actual parlance, the only "alt" to right is either "left" or "wrong." Call them what they are: ideological extremists. They may not like that label, but it's the one they've embraced. So wear it!
8
This article seems to be blaming the victim. The "alt right" has found an enemy, a punching bag, is screaming in all caps. Worst of all, it is proving there's no such thing as neutrality. The transgression here is Google's and it is part of a campaign we've seen in corporations, in public schools and in universities to control thought. Put the blame where it is due.
2
The alt right will do battle with anyone and anything that brings in the money. But the more transparent that their motives become, the more marginalized they will become. Still, their tilt towards anger and hate will always drew a crowd, just like train wrecks. However, taking on the Valley only strengthens the forces against them, which is a good thing.
2
Intelligence has a liberal bias.
12
Mr Damore's story goes like this:
- All Google employees are told, when hired, that they should feel free to speak their minds without the fear of being punished for doing so.
- Google provides venues within the company to promote the exchange of ideas.
- Mr Damore chose to believe what Google had been telling him, and published his thoughts in a 10-page, well-written, articulate document.
- Google violates its own propaganda and fires Mr Damore for speaking his mind.
- The VP of "inclusion" decries Mr Damore's words, as if she were the VP of "exclusion".
- The CEO fires Mr Damore, claiming that all ideas should be spoken, but not "bad" ones.
- The VP of "inclusion" and the CEO both write messages that look like the same politically-correct vomit that all major corporation spin doctors deliver, and which no rational person accepts as valid, intelligent, or honest.
- All Google employees are told, when hired, that they should feel free to speak their minds without the fear of being punished for doing so.
- Google provides venues within the company to promote the exchange of ideas.
- Mr Damore chose to believe what Google had been telling him, and published his thoughts in a 10-page, well-written, articulate document.
- Google violates its own propaganda and fires Mr Damore for speaking his mind.
- The VP of "inclusion" decries Mr Damore's words, as if she were the VP of "exclusion".
- The CEO fires Mr Damore, claiming that all ideas should be spoken, but not "bad" ones.
- The VP of "inclusion" and the CEO both write messages that look like the same politically-correct vomit that all major corporation spin doctors deliver, and which no rational person accepts as valid, intelligent, or honest.
5
They can fire whomever they like, for everything.
And, BTW, his memo was poorly-written nonsense. Footnotes and charts don't make it science. I'd have fired him for that.
And, BTW, his memo was poorly-written nonsense. Footnotes and charts don't make it science. I'd have fired him for that.
2
Lol, well written, articulate?
I'd have given a high school senior a C- on this. And that would be generous.
You need to up your standards.
I'd have given a high school senior a C- on this. And that would be generous.
You need to up your standards.
1
Has anyone else noticed the liberal bias of auto-fill? All I do is type the letter "N" and NYTimes pops up. "No," as in "The Party of No," is way down in fifth place. Also, spell-correct seems highly prejudiced.
1
Real headline in Thursday's print edition: "Russia Wants Innovation, but Jails Innovators." Potential other headline: "Google wants opinions, but fires the opinionated."
3
If we pursue gender equality this way — an equality that is brittle to a poorly constructed dissent like this, an equality where the only adequate defense is to fire the dissenting author — what kind of equality will we have achieved?
5
"Activists accuse tech companies like Google and Paypal of censoring right-wing views" - from the synopsis.
Why does the Times use the term "right wing" when I've never seen it use "left-wing"? Has the paper ever referred to Bernie Sanders or Maxine Waters as left wing? Is this not one more example of liberal bias in the mainstream national media?
Why does the Times use the term "right wing" when I've never seen it use "left-wing"? Has the paper ever referred to Bernie Sanders or Maxine Waters as left wing? Is this not one more example of liberal bias in the mainstream national media?
4
This is like the church being told by Galileo that the Earth isn't the center of the universe. Grow up children, there are other people on this planet other than white men and they have rights too.
2
I say lighten up. It's all strictly business. The likes of Google may have over-reacted but it comes from concern, if not outright fear, that their customer base will be eroded. It's the very same type of reaction witnessed in them, Facebook, et.al., caving to the Chinese in self-censoring, self-limiting, ways (all while continuing to claim they are bastions of freedom, thought, etc.). They are just doing what Capitalists always do; acquiescing out of concerns over losing business. Basically they are cowards. Get it?
John~
American Net'Zen
John~
American Net'Zen
1
Google is now a mature company like IBM. Once they stop tolerating the weirdos; the brilliant jerks and have human resource departments that rule the culture, the risk takers and those smart enough to keep their views to themselves move on and start new companies where the social mores are far from the mainstream.
The so-called alt right may go after Google because its now the establishment but very quietly the misfits will leave and create something new outside the watchful eye of the vice president of diversity. Rinse and repeat.
The so-called alt right may go after Google because its now the establishment but very quietly the misfits will leave and create something new outside the watchful eye of the vice president of diversity. Rinse and repeat.
12
Donald Trump has spewed hate and venom through his Twitter account. He has violated its policy of community standards and has used it to intimidate his opponents. It is high time that Twitter should close his account for violation of its user policy.
4
Alt right / conservative speech my eye. It is racist speech and should not be tolerated.
3
Who cares what the who cares what the alt.right thinks? I'm really tired of them being so sensitive. They are what they claim the liberals to be.
2
The alt-righties are free to boycott Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon, Apple, Twitter, and the rest of the tech industry.
Please.
Please.
3
From Damore's statement: "In addition to the Left’s affinity for those it sees as weak, humans are generally biased towards protecting females."
The construction is telling. No one would say that Africans who survived the Middle Passage were "weak" or that the slaves who were worked, often to death, were "weak." No one would say that the Chinese who built the railroads in the western US were "weak." The gay men who lived their lives in the closet and did everything straight men did professionally were not "weak." My pioneer great-grandmothers who could slaughter, dress, and butcher cattle and game single-handedly were not "weak." The women who stepped in to fill factory jobs during WWII were not "weak." The African American men who fought in our wars even while the military was segregated were not "weak."
These populations were, and in some cases still are, systematically disadvantaged. Their lack of equal representation in positions of power or high-status non-labor jobs is an effect of historical political positions. The Left's affinity is for political positions that do not arbitrarily disadvantage groups of people.
Google, and any other company (or industry) facing a labor shortage, has an inherent interest in increasing the labor pool. One strategy is to broaden the pool geographically. Another is to compensate for systematic disadvantage so that qualified people can be brought into that labor pool.
It's not an anti-conservative bias. It's convergent evolution.
The construction is telling. No one would say that Africans who survived the Middle Passage were "weak" or that the slaves who were worked, often to death, were "weak." No one would say that the Chinese who built the railroads in the western US were "weak." The gay men who lived their lives in the closet and did everything straight men did professionally were not "weak." My pioneer great-grandmothers who could slaughter, dress, and butcher cattle and game single-handedly were not "weak." The women who stepped in to fill factory jobs during WWII were not "weak." The African American men who fought in our wars even while the military was segregated were not "weak."
These populations were, and in some cases still are, systematically disadvantaged. Their lack of equal representation in positions of power or high-status non-labor jobs is an effect of historical political positions. The Left's affinity is for political positions that do not arbitrarily disadvantage groups of people.
Google, and any other company (or industry) facing a labor shortage, has an inherent interest in increasing the labor pool. One strategy is to broaden the pool geographically. Another is to compensate for systematic disadvantage so that qualified people can be brought into that labor pool.
It's not an anti-conservative bias. It's convergent evolution.
2
This is another "do as I say, not as I do" moment for liberals. You can't fly around in private jets screaming climate change, you can't pay your HRC female staffers less and shout pay inequity, nor is it wise to take up the fight for the middle class and minorities, then once elected, ignore them. The hypocrisy chickens have come home to roost.
4
Sure you can. You don't believe the alt-right faux Googles and Paypals are going to succeed, do you?
The fact that you guys can't live without posting in progressive sites like the NYT means any alt-right Twitter wannabe is doomed.
The fact that you guys can't live without posting in progressive sites like the NYT means any alt-right Twitter wannabe is doomed.
4
No business, no matter how large and dominating is guaranteed sustainable success these days. Any CEO who would think differently will surely be taught a lesson.
The media needs to come up with another moniker for the alt-right - these people are not in any form or fashion "right wing" or "conservative". Just because you're not "liberal" doesn't make you conservative, especially in the case of those called the "alt-right" by the news media. This group of people are in a class all by themselves. Their views are not mainstream. They have a perverted and distorted view of the world and people in general. Calling them "right wing" or "conservative" would be equal to calling someone that suffers from schizophrenia and delusional thinking a conservative. These are the kind of people that would shout "fire" in a crowded theater and claim "freedom of speech" though there was no fire but only panic. These are the kind of people that feed off of hate and prejudice. No, these people aren't conservative. They are liberal anarchists, willing to burn down our whole country for the sake of their distorted and twisted view of man and society. Call them what they are - sycophants.
1
So, because of Trump in the White House, a massive global right-wing movement is poisoning the air we breathe, not only in the USA but most significantly in Europe (Italy especially), where a non-stop flow of migrants from sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East is changing the way politics is laid bare - and globally, even in Canada. It is pretty clear people like Lauren Southern are part of an assault on democratic values of tolerance, help-thy-neighbor, acceptance of the other as a human being in need. Picture this: European extreme-right big shots are stipulating unspeakable wicked pacts with African and Middle Eastern human traffickers - with the mafia as mediator - in order to create as much intolerance (Europe is being "invaded" by Islamic terrorists, and non-Europeans are taking people's jobs away - a solid populist myth) speculating constantly on fears and instilling terror. Far-right demagogues sitting pretty in European Parliaments and in the US Congress in cahoots with organized crime's bosses and under-bosses from countries so hypocritically condemned as disrupting the status quo, tilting the political pendulum to the extreme-right, engendering more racism, fomenting violence and prejudice instead? You bet; these are all Alt-right tenets.
I take exception to the terminology used here. Why does The Times use the term, "Alt-Right", in its headline when referring to right leaning as well? It is an incorrect term here. (Yes, it's clickbait. I know)
There are plenty of mainstream Americans and publications, for example, that have mocked the latest Google firing.
At least The Times acknowledges that Silicon Valley is "steeped in social liberalism". I notice it doesn't refer to Silicon Valley as "radical leftwing", which is how many actually think of it. That might be too biased for The Times.
There are plenty of mainstream Americans and publications, for example, that have mocked the latest Google firing.
At least The Times acknowledges that Silicon Valley is "steeped in social liberalism". I notice it doesn't refer to Silicon Valley as "radical leftwing", which is how many actually think of it. That might be too biased for The Times.
3
It's true, the Times should tell people the so-called Alt-Right is just the Right now, also called the Republican party. There's no daylight between them at all.
3
"The alt right is accusing people of a liberal bias"
On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - a declaration of liberalism. Read it here!
"Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection." FDR, shortly before he died in 1944, had this to say about the need for a 2nd Bill of Rights - a Bill of Liberalism ,-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EZ5bx9AyI4
The Alt Right is the antithesis of liberalism. It often encompasses " isolationist, protectionist, antisemitic, and white supremacist, frequently overlapping with Neo-Nazism, nativism and Islamophobia, anti feminism and homophobia, right-wing populism, and the neo-reactionary movement. The concept has further been associated with multiple groups from American nationalists, neo-monarchists, men's rights advocates. Misogynists - they hated Hillary.
The future is embracing Liberalism. The Alt-Right is a dying ideology of HATE!
On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - a declaration of liberalism. Read it here!
"Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection." FDR, shortly before he died in 1944, had this to say about the need for a 2nd Bill of Rights - a Bill of Liberalism ,-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EZ5bx9AyI4
The Alt Right is the antithesis of liberalism. It often encompasses " isolationist, protectionist, antisemitic, and white supremacist, frequently overlapping with Neo-Nazism, nativism and Islamophobia, anti feminism and homophobia, right-wing populism, and the neo-reactionary movement. The concept has further been associated with multiple groups from American nationalists, neo-monarchists, men's rights advocates. Misogynists - they hated Hillary.
The future is embracing Liberalism. The Alt-Right is a dying ideology of HATE!
5
The alt-right is confusing intellectualism with liberalism since any type of intellectual discussion on social or political issues is beyond their capabilities. I only agree with dissenters that Google should not have fired the employee. He is entitled to his opinions as much as they are not rooted in facts or hard data as to why women are under represented in the IT industry.
26
Mr. Damone is certainly entitled to his opinions. However, freedom of speech doesn't protect him from the consequences of disseminating those opinions as he did, and Google, a non-governmental corporation, has every right to fire someone who could be considered to cause or contribute to a hostile work environment and/or reflect badly on the company itself.
1
I don't agree about the firing. That writer was entitled, as you say, to his opinions. But Google is equally entitled to dismiss an employee for creating a hostile work environment with his bigoted and groundless perspectives.
1
They can fire him for using the wrong pocket protector if they choose.
1
The right can be purveyors of political correctness as much as the left. Accusing Silicon Valley of liberal biases is telling Silicon Valley they are politically incorrect. Rightists calling more moderate conservatives "RINOS", Republicans In Name Only, is nothing more than uber political correctness. Silicon Valley, for all it many shortcomings, along with all decent and reasonable Americans, regardless of their politics, should tell the "alt" right to take that long walk off that short pier.
10
The alt-right can't stand opposition. So fight them forever, until the end.
11
This is their MO, claiming their views are being disrespected, when their views are actually bigoted & exclusionary in themselves. It's crazy yet sly, turning progressivism & tolerance back on itself.
This op-ed, and the posters to the op-ed, excusing or encouraging Google's conduct, obviously don't get where this is going. Google is within its legal rights to hire or fire for a 'good reason, bad reason or no reason.' But of course, companies controlled by conservatives may apply the same rationale and engage in the same conduct. Liberals and leftists who write memos, or post their political views on Facebook or other social media, may be fired for exactly the same reasons. Then, it will make sense to determine, on employment applications, what the political views of the candidate are: after all, an employer may fire or hire for a good reason, bad reason or no reason. It will not be necessary then to screen candidates on the basis of stereotypes that the nation's discrimination laws seek to prohibit - employers may effectively conduct their screening by determining the political views and the organizations with which a candidate is associated. This is exactly the direction we should not be going in and Google's enforcement of left-wing groupthink is exactly the fuel of further retaliation, discrimination, and division. It is hypocritical and ridiculous to talk about diversity and then fire people with non-acceptable political or social beliefs.
9
People in the workplace can have their political views, but when they cross the line and begin to put them out into the public arena with full disclosure of their where they work knowing full well that their views are contrary to the organizations views, they should know the possible repercussions. If the employee is that disenchanted with the organization's beliefs / culture, find another job!
5
This is not an op-ed.
No. Companies that fire people for political views would be sued out of existence in short order. What you don't understand is that Google's actions weren't political. The alt-rights actions are, but that doesn't make Google's actions political.
No. Companies that fire people for political views would be sued out of existence in short order. What you don't understand is that Google's actions weren't political. The alt-rights actions are, but that doesn't make Google's actions political.
1
Roger,
Should all the liberals or Democrats who work at any of the Koch Industries companies resign to 'find another job'?, or simply keep forever quiet?
Should all the liberals or Democrats who work at any of the Koch Industries companies resign to 'find another job'?, or simply keep forever quiet?
I work as a partner in a tech startup, Cinchapi. We absolutely embrace a talented yet diverse work force because having people with different perspectives makes for better products.
That's not being politically correct; it's just common sense.
That's not being politically correct; it's just common sense.
9
The concern should not be political correctness, but whether perspectives are at least fact-based and scientifically backed, especially in the tech world, where one should assume a minimum of education and at least some sophistication exists in the people that work there. An ill-advised opinion serves no one.
All of these companies are run under a free market economic model which now, according to the Supreme Court, includes First Amendment protections. I should think that the alt-right would want to celebrate such economic freedom and would work to uphold the independence of these entrepreneur-driven, stockholder supported momuments to the U.S. free market system. Or does that celebration begin and end with Chick-fil-A, Walmart, and Hobby Lobby?
5
"...a pervasive, industrywide liberal bias..."
Well, reality, science, and facts do have a liberal bias.
Well, reality, science, and facts do have a liberal bias.
32
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Also science.
6
Not true for science
2
Reality bends left.
1
I am not sure how anyone can believe that right wing views are censored. The have seeped and oozed and crept into all the interstices of society.
What makes the alt-right mad is when people refuse to accept and act on those views. Any company can fire an employee who makes the company look bad publicly. And the company can be the decider of which views are toxic to the company's bottom line. People can hold the views, they just cannot let bad publicity go public.
The tech market - for competitive employees, for products, for advertising audience - skews young and educated. Tech companies want to appeal broadly to that audience. If that means that they publicly do not want to project the image of a group of people who think women are to nicey nice, too cooperative, and genetically and socially unsuited to the competitive boys club environment that some mistake as a natural law rather than a human manufactured environment, then so be it. That is the crux of de-regulation - companies run themselves on their own agendas. Let Hobby Lobby lead the way for the alt-right instead.
We have free speech in this country. That means we don't jail people for speech. It does not mean that there are no consequences socially and financially.
What makes the alt-right mad is when people refuse to accept and act on those views. Any company can fire an employee who makes the company look bad publicly. And the company can be the decider of which views are toxic to the company's bottom line. People can hold the views, they just cannot let bad publicity go public.
The tech market - for competitive employees, for products, for advertising audience - skews young and educated. Tech companies want to appeal broadly to that audience. If that means that they publicly do not want to project the image of a group of people who think women are to nicey nice, too cooperative, and genetically and socially unsuited to the competitive boys club environment that some mistake as a natural law rather than a human manufactured environment, then so be it. That is the crux of de-regulation - companies run themselves on their own agendas. Let Hobby Lobby lead the way for the alt-right instead.
We have free speech in this country. That means we don't jail people for speech. It does not mean that there are no consequences socially and financially.
26
First Amendment protections only apply against government censorship; in most states a company has the right to fire an employee for no reason at all. While this is a different situation the fight over whether Hobby Lobby should comply with the law of the land comes to mind. There, the alt-right argued that companies had the first amendment right to live by its values. Well, Google dismissed Mr. Damore because he violated the company's values. Like the saying goes what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
29
Good point...the alt-right has fought in many states for "right to work" laws (euphemism for anti-union), allowing businesses to easily fire employees. How ironic!
5
Only when the government steps in and forces Google to rehire that employee.
1
AACNY,
Yeah? Can you give us an example of Hobby Lobby or Chic Filet being forced by the federal government to rehire someone?
Yeah? Can you give us an example of Hobby Lobby or Chic Filet being forced by the federal government to rehire someone?
2
And then these ultra-right-wing types can watch their friendly self-created companies go out of business because there just aren't enough paying activists to make them work. What a pity.
13
"one day they could serve as the foundation for a kind of parallel right-wing internet where all speech is allowed, no matter how noxious or incendiary". How delightful that the alt-right is most concerned about being noxious or incendiary. Their primary goal isn't to present an opposing opinion but to use words as razors to cut up their opponents.
11
Amazing. Now running a company according to values is anti free speech. What about faith based companies that are conservative and expect their employees to act accordingly? Are they not allowed to hire/fire?
24
Right. How inclusive of free thought and expression in their corporate cultures are the companies like Hobby Lobby, Chick Fil A and others?
1
No, unless you are a church, you cannot.
Alt-Left in Silicon Valley is getting its fair share. Progress!
3
Its "fair share"?
For what? Treating people as equals?
Yeah, the horror. Afer all, the white heterosexual male is innately superior, and it's about time we all just accepted reality and moved on.
That about cover it?
For what? Treating people as equals?
Yeah, the horror. Afer all, the white heterosexual male is innately superior, and it's about time we all just accepted reality and moved on.
That about cover it?
11
"superior" I think not. That about cover it?
Of course -- balance out respect for others, humility, respect and other now outdated values with hate, fear, racism and intolerance.
That would take us back to the 19th century, for sure, unless Trump unleashes a nuclear war that would take us back to the caves -- where maybe some of these folks prefer anyway.
Ah, the veneer of civilization is truly thin.
That would take us back to the 19th century, for sure, unless Trump unleashes a nuclear war that would take us back to the caves -- where maybe some of these folks prefer anyway.
Ah, the veneer of civilization is truly thin.
The alt-right isn't alone in bridling at this kind of corporate posturing.
I work for a fortune 100 tech company in the upper ranks. Our female EVP (second to the CEO) has made promoting women in the organization one of her missions.
During a leadership gathering, she had the CEO speak to the group, during which he said "women are better managers than men" as the cap to the two hours of her showcasing women leaders in the organization.
Imagine if he had said "men are better managers than women." Of course that won't happen, and there was nothing said about the CEOs sexist comments because of the craven double standards of gender politics.
I work for a fortune 100 tech company in the upper ranks. Our female EVP (second to the CEO) has made promoting women in the organization one of her missions.
During a leadership gathering, she had the CEO speak to the group, during which he said "women are better managers than men" as the cap to the two hours of her showcasing women leaders in the organization.
Imagine if he had said "men are better managers than women." Of course that won't happen, and there was nothing said about the CEOs sexist comments because of the craven double standards of gender politics.
48
So quit. Find a happier man-place. That's your right.
2
Was wondering the same thing. Would the Google employee have been fired for claiming women make better [fill-in-the-blank]s?
2
As a feminist, I agree, Matt, that your CEO's statement was outrageous. The goal of feminists is not to promote women as better than men, but that women and men are *equal*.
Yes, there are obvious physiological differences, making one sex--on average--better at some tasks than others (upper body strength, endurance, etc.). (And individuals will continue to be outliers.)
There almost certainly are physiological differences that make one sex--again, on average--more adept than the other at various cognitive-psycho-social tasks, but discerning those physiological traits from the effects of cultural influences (which have been with us for millennia) has yet to be achieved. It's the old nature vs. nurture with a dash of eons-old prejudice.
Rather than assume that we know what those physiological differences are, feminists ask that we attempt to present equal *opportunities* to men and women.
So yes, a feminist DOES find the statement "women are better managers than men" just as offensive as the reverse.
Yes, there are obvious physiological differences, making one sex--on average--better at some tasks than others (upper body strength, endurance, etc.). (And individuals will continue to be outliers.)
There almost certainly are physiological differences that make one sex--again, on average--more adept than the other at various cognitive-psycho-social tasks, but discerning those physiological traits from the effects of cultural influences (which have been with us for millennia) has yet to be achieved. It's the old nature vs. nurture with a dash of eons-old prejudice.
Rather than assume that we know what those physiological differences are, feminists ask that we attempt to present equal *opportunities* to men and women.
So yes, a feminist DOES find the statement "women are better managers than men" just as offensive as the reverse.
3
It is hilarious to see the alt-right now seeking to find in the 1st Amendment a fundamental right to political speech -- one that employers cannot violate. It is just plain bizarre to see them use that non-existent right to defend the expression of identity politics, which they had been trying to identify as an exclusive left-wing product.
23
I've read the memo and the responses. There were good points, laced with ridiculous ideas about masculine qualities that are needed to be a sucessful software engineer. What gets me, is that now conservatives are outraged that there is pushback from women over views that question thier fitness for a certain vocation. What do they expect? It's no longer just a white man's world. Others have opinions that count. Even in the world of ideas, these guys don't want to compete. This isn't about political correctness. It's about their unhappiness over being shouted down by the majority in the public forum. The world will not be their Fox Network or alt-right internet forum. They must learn to express ideas without insulting other groups of people, or face this kind of reaction.
35
There is not "pushback" from women, there is suppression. And you are a fraud to say men don't want to compete on ideas. Debate is a competition, and it's obvious women don't want to have that competition.
@ William Workman
Just because something is "obvious" to you, doesn't mean it's true.
Just because something is "obvious" to you, doesn't mean it's true.
Let's let's hope the alt-right decides to boycott the internet.
55
I haven't yet encountered a single argument advanced by someone professing "alt-right" views which I didn't find repugnant and ethically bereft of any morality.
I read widely, am considered open-minded, but no way would I want one of these alt-right individuals anywhere near any project the well-being of myself, my family or friends depended on. The feeling would probably be mutual given my family is multi-ethnic and my friends come from all over the globe.
I read widely, am considered open-minded, but no way would I want one of these alt-right individuals anywhere near any project the well-being of myself, my family or friends depended on. The feeling would probably be mutual given my family is multi-ethnic and my friends come from all over the globe.
43
You can't admit your biases and deny them at the same time. Oh wait, you just did. Never mind.
You need one of those hand-on-a-stick things so you can pat yourself on the back.
"It’s a tech company’s right, of course, to bar whomever it wishes."
This generalization is at once both unduly sweeping and terminally vague.
This generalization is at once both unduly sweeping and terminally vague.
4
And utterly correct, with the exception of union organization.
Not really, a business can hire who they wise and support ideas that they wish. This works in both directions such as Hobby Lobby which pushes supposed Christian conservative religious values. A company can deny a KKKer or a gay activist.
Wow - the most successful, forward-thinking, popular and every-one uses thing in forever was made via a liberal bias?
Shocking.
Shocking.
28
This is my favorite comment of the day.
It's ironic that the anti-science reactionaries want to use, gasp, science to protest.
Of course, they may believe that the Internet is run by God.
It's ironic that the anti-science reactionaries want to use, gasp, science to protest.
Of course, they may believe that the Internet is run by God.
1
No, the battle is not with some "far right" extremists, but with ordinary centrist moderates who understand that the hair-trigger moral panics of self-proclaimed "progressives" have driven political discourse into quicksand surrounded by malarial swamp. The degree of sheer irrationality is astounding.
13
Centrist moderates? Yes, if one considers Paul Ryan a leftist.
2
Whether it is allowed or not, hate speech is not political discourse nor does it contribute to political discourse. It is simply hate speech.
Yes, the ugliest feature of liberals today is how they brand opposition to their viewpoints in the most negative ways possible. Their arrogance keeps them from even considering that an opposing viewpoint might have merit. To acknowledge that is now heresy, requiring swift and severe punishment.
Like firing someone for, ironically, creating an unsafe space at work where different views are supposed to be safely expressed.
In terms of public discourse and discussion, they are like "weeds". They strangle any new growth and don't allow ideas to flourish, controlling the terrain and choking off new thought.
Like firing someone for, ironically, creating an unsafe space at work where different views are supposed to be safely expressed.
In terms of public discourse and discussion, they are like "weeds". They strangle any new growth and don't allow ideas to flourish, controlling the terrain and choking off new thought.
2
I work in software development. There are generally two types of individuals: sensitive creative types and high functioning aspergers/autistic types who are especially good at bug hunting. The latter tend to be like the type that wrote this memo.
30
Are the traits related to gender? Careful now, before you answer that, you don't want to get fired.
So few of the many comments I read even mention women -- that is the core of the controversy, right? Whether women are as capable as men at coding or other IT work? Why Is that? One woman commenter wrote about the difficulty of being liberal in an older tech company and put herself in Damore's shoes. Why couldn't these fellas try to do the same? The only reasons women are sidelined out of computer work are money and power. Of course women can do the job and are around the world. Men band together to keep money and power for themselves. Making it worse, they hide behind rationalism. Whether it is the alt-right or Silicon Valley engineers, sharing is not big on their agenda.
20
"They [the alt-right] have found a new punching bag, and they have proved that in the hyper-polarized Trump era, there is no such thing as neutrality."
Seriously, who is punching whom? Google has a market capitalization of $655 billion. Google has access to hundreds of millions of individuals' private emails.
Seriously, who is punching whom? Google has a market capitalization of $655 billion. Google has access to hundreds of millions of individuals' private emails.
4
A punching bag made out of steel reinforced concrete. Wrong punching bag.
1
Isn't it strange that the "Alt Right" and the White House and its occupants are the ones making the best use of new technologies?, while democrats are leaderless and rudderless with no message, no ideas and no plan other than to rail against Trump.
Strange days indeed.......
Why don't some of theses mega wealthy Silicon Valley dudes buy a controlling interest in Fox News ?, it would be pocket change to them and they could take control of "Alt Right" messaging, now that would be funny.
Strange days indeed.......
Why don't some of theses mega wealthy Silicon Valley dudes buy a controlling interest in Fox News ?, it would be pocket change to them and they could take control of "Alt Right" messaging, now that would be funny.
23
Making the best use of new technologies? Yeah those Russian bots driving fake stories on social media are really impressive.
I love the sentiment, but Mr Murdoch has stitched up the company's control so that, effectively, only his shares count.
Is a controlling interest for sale?
That's why.
That's why.
Do these sites allow progressives to go on and dispute their philosophies and facts? If not, they cannot object to mainstream censorship of them, only to mainstream hypocrisy. And if so, then they are betraying their own values and allowing what they call propaganda to infiltrate their sites.
I was kicked off one of these sites a while back. I just put it down to that they cant handle the truth, because I was not being snarky.
I was kicked off one of these sites a while back. I just put it down to that they cant handle the truth, because I was not being snarky.
17
I have a friend who was blocked by Trump on Twitter.
She's my hero.
She's my hero.
1
Please stop using the line that the right, or the alt right, or the ultra right, stand for "absolute free speech". They don't. They just want the freedom to disseminate hateful views without consequences. They don't want completely open debate without limits. They just want to always have the upper hand, because they are willing to resort to threats, intimidation and violence, and expect to be given a pass.
The fact is that every political ideology has its own ideas about what controls should be applied to public speech acts. Casting yourself and your allies as "lovers of freedom" and everyone else as an authoritarian comes down to little more than arbitrary definition. It should not be taken seriously.
The fact is that every political ideology has its own ideas about what controls should be applied to public speech acts. Casting yourself and your allies as "lovers of freedom" and everyone else as an authoritarian comes down to little more than arbitrary definition. It should not be taken seriously.
50
"willing to resort to threats, intimidation and violence, and expect to be given a pass" sounds like the simplistic students at American universities intent on driving out any opinions save for their own in their little comfort zones.
7
Not true Edward. Everyone who disagrees with the totalitarian view and every single issue is labeled extreme right, alt right etc when in fact most these people are independent, not even right. I respect your views but I happen to disagree with them. Does it make me alt right if I've never even voted Republican, let alone be registered as a Republican? There are millions of people like me, and we hate to be labeled with this stupid alt right or extreme right each time our views go against to what is pushed on us. If you'd step out of the NYT echo-chamber you'll understand. James Damore the engineer who wrote the memo, if you take a look at his interview and read his paper, he is anything but alt right.
1
If you think it was a wise decision for Google to fire the engineer the engineer instead of having a discussion with him, then your description of "hate speech" includes anyone who does not agree with authoritarian leftists.
1
It's not enough that they have a president and congress, now they want their discriminatory views to be forced on the workplace environment, too?
31
Who is the snowflake now?
47
The so-called "Alt-right" is ALWAYS looking for a fight with anyone, anywhere who they complain is hurting their feelings.
These people have always been with us; they're more easily understood as right-wing extremists, ultra-conservatives, and often as unhinged conspiracy theorists whose paranoia knows no bounds.
So now they're planning to whine, screech and troll against "Silicon Valley"---ironically the very people who've enabled them to connect with each other and spread their vile threats and sociopathic hatred far and wide.
Yawn...this will last for a few weeks or so until they find their next DTOHAT (Designated Target Of Hatred and Trolling) and find an entirely new direction for their limitless echo chamber of resentment, victimization and juvenile pouting.
These people have always been with us; they're more easily understood as right-wing extremists, ultra-conservatives, and often as unhinged conspiracy theorists whose paranoia knows no bounds.
So now they're planning to whine, screech and troll against "Silicon Valley"---ironically the very people who've enabled them to connect with each other and spread their vile threats and sociopathic hatred far and wide.
Yawn...this will last for a few weeks or so until they find their next DTOHAT (Designated Target Of Hatred and Trolling) and find an entirely new direction for their limitless echo chamber of resentment, victimization and juvenile pouting.
60
The so called alt-right has become a big tent word that comprises everyone who is against the views purported by the maintream media, progressives, independents, moderate Republicans and I assume extreme right, who ever they are (I haven't met them). The tent word alt-right was created to blanket shame all independent thinkers into submission and loss of free speech.
This is it exactly. White Resentment Delivery System.
2
They should definitely boycott Google and other tech companies they don't like for liberal bias so they can see how little impact they have on these companies. Increasingly, many of these companies traffic and revenue is coming from overseas. So, there is no way these companies are going to bend to these white supremacist groups that are a fraction of their revenue.
If they hate liberals so much why are they even using these products in the first place? I certainly don't shop at Hobby Lobby or other places who's philosophy I don't agree with.
If they hate liberals so much why are they even using these products in the first place? I certainly don't shop at Hobby Lobby or other places who's philosophy I don't agree with.
46
There are very few right supremacists in the country. About as many as there are BLM police assassins. Conservatives criticize right supremacists. Leftists praise people who advocate killing police as well as the inappropriately named antifascists, who wear masks and throw Molotov cocktails to protest free speech.
1
"The alt-right" is the new boogieman of the far left. As a Jew I've experienced far more hatred and abuse from the left then the alt-right both in person and what I see online/social media. Anyone who disagrees with any liberal dogma is now alt-right. There is an attempt to silence legitimate criticism by warning liberals that they sound like the alt-right or are playing into their hand. We have seen Linda Sarsour and her supporters do this again and again to ignore the blatant anti-Jewish racism of her, the Women's March co-chairs, and the left in general.
If you don't be careful soon 95% of America- including minorities, women, and gays will fall into the "alt-right" category in your book and you'll be dumbstruck as to what happened.
If you don't be careful soon 95% of America- including minorities, women, and gays will fall into the "alt-right" category in your book and you'll be dumbstruck as to what happened.
16
I seriously doubt that will ever happen. There are still a lot of educated people in America.
The notion that progressives are inherently antisemitic and pose more of a threat to Jews or any other minority in America than the alt-right is laughable nonsense.
1
This is hyperbole. There are extremists on both sides. 99% of liberals have no idea who Sarsour is. That people are no longer falling over themselves to make excuses for Israel does not make the "Left" racist or anti Semitic, though I understand it feels very personal. On the other hand, these alt-Right friends of yours... I'd be wary.
2
If Google's "politically correct" policies result in hiring people who are unsuited for the jobs, the company seems to be doing remarkably well despite these hiring mistakes.
28
Although not billed as such, the "echo chamber" is a place where critical thinkers oppose the dubious beliefs of the alt-right. If too many people disagree with them, they suggest it must be close mindedness and group think, because how could anyone possibly disagree with their views?
The title of the memo got the pages off to a rocking start by suggesting that Google is one such "echo chamber." Similar to the propaganda techniques by Trump and supporters, the goal is to accuse others of the very darkness that you hold inside yourself. Because liberal thinkers actually do tend to be more open minded to opposing viewpoints, such accusations often confuse people. But only for a moment. It quickly becomes clear that it's pseudo-intellectual nonsense.
The title of the memo got the pages off to a rocking start by suggesting that Google is one such "echo chamber." Similar to the propaganda techniques by Trump and supporters, the goal is to accuse others of the very darkness that you hold inside yourself. Because liberal thinkers actually do tend to be more open minded to opposing viewpoints, such accusations often confuse people. But only for a moment. It quickly becomes clear that it's pseudo-intellectual nonsense.
22
Liberal thinkers are close minded.
2
If there's a bias, it's toward sanity and the 21st century.
24
Alt-right loners and misfits see "liberal bias" in truth, decency, diversity and tolerance. On multiple levels, this is not an issue of free speech. Rather than expanding their horizons and promoting self-growth, alt-righters' fear compels a desperate movement to reverse progress and thereby validate their fears and bitterness.
24
Rich, just wondering if you've ever travelled out of San Francisco in your life?
13
And your point is...?
I'm about as far away from the alt-right as one can get, but I'm deeply disturbed by Google's actions here along with the reporting I've seen, including this one and several articles from the Times. This article opens with a false statement, claiming the "manifesto" showed grievances with Google's "progressive values" when in fact the author was very clearly pro-diversity, but was actually pointing out how some of Google's approaches for increasing diversity may be harmful and how they could be improved upon. I really expect the Times, its readers, and Google to be better than Trump, but this episode is proving otherwise.
38
True. Here's a link with an interview with James Damore:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-09/fired-googler-speaks-out-google...
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-09/fired-googler-speaks-out-google...
6
No, he mouthed the words, but his heart wasn't in it. Even a cursory read of his rambling text shows that he is speaking from a position of complacent ignorance. He uncritically uses the term "PC" as a characterisation with the force of a knock-down argument, froths about "PC-authoritarians" and derides minorities for putatively always banging on about "oppression".
He's a typical unreconstructed rationalist liberal in the classical sense who refuses to come to terms with difference and context. He tries to forestall criticism by gesturing at a recognition of his own bias and subjectivity, but ultimately his critique is wholly uninformed by any such awareness.
He's a typical unreconstructed rationalist liberal in the classical sense who refuses to come to terms with difference and context. He tries to forestall criticism by gesturing at a recognition of his own bias and subjectivity, but ultimately his critique is wholly uninformed by any such awareness.
9
I've read the complete memo and, while Mr Damore certainly doesn't present himself as anything like 'alt-right', his argument is flawed in a couple of fundamental ways (ironically one of them is the exact point he makes in his introductory remarks about extrapolating whole-population characteristics onto smaller populations).
However I'm not sure that firing him immediately was the right response. I think a careful, measured, response to the issues he raised would have been better. It would have dealt with the issues and allayed the concerns of other Googlers. My own assessment of him is that he's presumed his (undoubted) intellectual ability gives him insights. A few conversations with similarly high-powered intellects from different backgrounds – which I'm sure are in ready supply at Google – might help him understand the challenges they face. And, thus, help him understand the value of diversity programmes.
The other reason I think Google got it wrong is that this alt-right/martyr response was entirely predictable. Which suggests they are in a bit of a 'bubble'!
However I'm not sure that firing him immediately was the right response. I think a careful, measured, response to the issues he raised would have been better. It would have dealt with the issues and allayed the concerns of other Googlers. My own assessment of him is that he's presumed his (undoubted) intellectual ability gives him insights. A few conversations with similarly high-powered intellects from different backgrounds – which I'm sure are in ready supply at Google – might help him understand the challenges they face. And, thus, help him understand the value of diversity programmes.
The other reason I think Google got it wrong is that this alt-right/martyr response was entirely predictable. Which suggests they are in a bit of a 'bubble'!
7
I've worked with Israelis who were good friends and colleagues with Palestinians - they disagreed on things having to do with Israel/Palestine/Occupied-Territories etc. but remained good friends BECAUSE THEY AVOIDED SUCH SUBJECTS. In the workplace (or somewhere which will bleed into the workplace), one avoids subjects that are going to cause trouble BECAUSE it gets in the way of the common goal - producing a product or providing a service. That is what people get paid for.
23
So perhaps Google should stop attempting to cram pseudo progressive values on the population and create an inclusive atmosphere?
2
The infamous Echo Chamber memo fundamentally said that you can't just start discriminating against hiring men (i.e., the necessarily result of affirmative action policies in a zero sum hiring context) just because there isn't perfect 50-50 representation of men and women among existing employees.
Because the disproportionate number of men in the employed group is not necessarily due to wrongful gender discrimination--there are all sorts of other plausible factors and lurking variables. Like the gender breakdown of the applicant pool as a result of self-selection by men and women into different fields of study.
It's an argument OPPOSED to discriminating against individuals based on their group status.
And it's just plain common sense.
Because the disproportionate number of men in the employed group is not necessarily due to wrongful gender discrimination--there are all sorts of other plausible factors and lurking variables. Like the gender breakdown of the applicant pool as a result of self-selection by men and women into different fields of study.
It's an argument OPPOSED to discriminating against individuals based on their group status.
And it's just plain common sense.
35
Thank you! You are the voice of reason, much like James Damore-a brave young man, indeed.
5
But 95:5 is rather different from "not 50:50", isn't it?
2
Yes, but you would not have been fired for this view, because you put it tastefully and neutrally, allowing the reasonable point in your argument to shine through. You did not express a personal view that women have self-selected out because they are neurotic and unable to withstand stress.
3
There have always been conservative engineers, both software and hardware, at Silicon Valley tech companies. My tech company was mostly conservatives and libertarians. It was uncomfortable for a left of center person like me. There were discussions at lunch time about flat tax rates, elimination of ESL in schools, and other conservative policies. There were never discussions of liberal policies, except when I would bring up legalizing Marijuana as a way to eliminate crimes associated with its usage and to increase sales tax revenue.
During the 1990s tech boom, there was a shift at the West coast start ups to more liberal views, although there was and is still a sizeable number of conservatives among engineers of all types..
Google is probably the most left leaning company in SF Bay area. I suppose conservatives at Google feel isolated a bit politicallly, like I did at my conservative older tech company as a liberal among conservatives. I never tried to impose my liberal views on my conservative coworkers (except for the Marijuana thing), despite feeling they were wrong headed with their odd selfish "me-me-me" views, of how the country should be run.
I did not debate them nor post anything political on message boards. I was well aware that politics was not to appear in writing on any company media. What mattered was that I loved my work and the opportunity to do work I felt was born to do, even though born female.
During the 1990s tech boom, there was a shift at the West coast start ups to more liberal views, although there was and is still a sizeable number of conservatives among engineers of all types..
Google is probably the most left leaning company in SF Bay area. I suppose conservatives at Google feel isolated a bit politicallly, like I did at my conservative older tech company as a liberal among conservatives. I never tried to impose my liberal views on my conservative coworkers (except for the Marijuana thing), despite feeling they were wrong headed with their odd selfish "me-me-me" views, of how the country should be run.
I did not debate them nor post anything political on message boards. I was well aware that politics was not to appear in writing on any company media. What mattered was that I loved my work and the opportunity to do work I felt was born to do, even though born female.
24
Yes. Of course Google is "left-leaning"...like the colleges that supply so many of their most skilled and astute employees; these are some of the most intelligent people in the world. Like most smart people their politics are indeed progressive and they're proud of it.
Clearly, there are some very intelligent conservatives and so-called "libertarians" but they are a small minority within their sorry and deeply confused ranks.
Clearly, there are some very intelligent conservatives and so-called "libertarians" but they are a small minority within their sorry and deeply confused ranks.
19
You of course have used a "scientifically based large data set" to form that view. Your science seems to say you can't be smart if you don't have a university education and aren't left of centre in your views. Doesn't seem very scientific, in fact your view reminds me of an email doing the rounds.
4
Well, I count myself as "progressive" on many issues, but many of the more well-reasoned and thoughtful articles I read these days appear in conservative outlets such as First Things, City Journal and The American Conservative. Rod Dreher at the latter has provided keen insights on the Google controversy, and are well-worth taking the time to read and ponder.
3
I think this is hilarious. Yes, 'alt-right', please do bring all your whiners to 'protest' Google - it'll be like bringing a stick to a gunfight. As for Milos Yiannopoulos, what could he do for James Damore? He threw away his own career to become an agent provocateur for Breitbart for hevvin's sake. I'd think Mr. Damore would rather he just stay away...far away. Bad enough that Julian Assange offered to hire him.
11
A pattern has emerged over the last few days where it's obvious that white Silicon Valley liberals are the ones most offended by Damore's memo. If you look at reactions throughout social media, minority men in Silicon Valley are disproportionate in defending him, especially Indians and Asians. Even CEO Sundar Pichai was loath to openly dismiss it.
This points to a problem culture among white urbanites, one that accepts PC culture as a way to shield their insecurities. They pretend to be open minded, but squeal the moment inequality is brought up as a social positive. The world doesn't need people like that.
It is one of the few good reasons for immigration. H1B visas should be given out to talented Asians so they can replace the staid white leftists with a more dynamic, and less egalitarian crop of immigrants.
This points to a problem culture among white urbanites, one that accepts PC culture as a way to shield their insecurities. They pretend to be open minded, but squeal the moment inequality is brought up as a social positive. The world doesn't need people like that.
It is one of the few good reasons for immigration. H1B visas should be given out to talented Asians so they can replace the staid white leftists with a more dynamic, and less egalitarian crop of immigrants.
10
You view the issue as one of forced egalitarianism, others view it as promoting equal opportunity against staid stereotypes of men and women and against harrassment - sometimes things may go to far, but that is the goal. I doubt you have ever been physically harrassed by fellow workers and instead of coding, worry about how to navigate that and whether there will be more. Speaking of stereotypes, your view and that of some others in the tech community is in line with the stereotype of that community.
9
Yes, but only if Asian H1B visa holders aren't Chinese or Indian. Taiwan, Japan and South Korea are OK.
1
Your default human seems to be male. Have you considered the existence of women?
1
Alt right, what does that mean and what exactly do they stand for. They truly sound like losers in life that want to blame someone or something for everything that is wrong with their lives. I understand failure, loss, heartbreak, poverty and life's challenges. I don't understand group hate, it's as pointless as religious cults.
11
Black Lives Matters is "liberal?" Unarmed African Americans are being killed by our police. Drawing attention to this fact doesn't seem liberal to me. It is just decent.
Kate
Kate
138
BLM uses lies, half truths and exaggerations to keep the black victim complex industry going, they also engage in open extortion. If one of 15 claims have some validity it doesn't change that most are false narratives. It shows a lack of integrity. Plenty of whites suffer from police brutality and poverty. We don't give them a free pass at acting abusive and violence over it. It should be noted Asians were targeted in the Baltimore and Ferguson riots just like they were targeted in the "anti-police brutality" LA riots in the 90's. Ever hear any of the BLM express condemnation over these hate crimes? Ever hear them condemn Mike Brown's attack on that Asian store clerk or the fact Brown's supporters later burned down his business? I'm sure white mobs who attacked blacks in the day had their excuses too.
Well said, KG.
The zero-sum, black/white view of these things is the problem. Points of view are instantly assessed as "left" or "right" and dealt with according to your chosen side.
And maybe the people who "oppose" Black Lives Matter need to be confronted with exactly your point and asked "So, are you in favour of unarmed African Americans being killed by police?"
The zero-sum, black/white view of these things is the problem. Points of view are instantly assessed as "left" or "right" and dealt with according to your chosen side.
And maybe the people who "oppose" Black Lives Matter need to be confronted with exactly your point and asked "So, are you in favour of unarmed African Americans being killed by police?"
2
KG: 'Black Lives Matters is "liberal?"'
You have a point, but not the one you intended.
The Times should have recognized that the BLM banner was a *political* statement by Facebook, and then asked: What does that political statement have to do with Facebook's BUSINESS?
You have a point, but not the one you intended.
The Times should have recognized that the BLM banner was a *political* statement by Facebook, and then asked: What does that political statement have to do with Facebook's BUSINESS?
Picture in your mind: Alt-right individuals trying to figure out how to go about their daily lives while trying to avoid contact with Silicon Valley's 'tech-giant' companies...LOLZ, right? The majority of the uncompassionate, small-minded, overwhelmingly self-interested members of this hate group live in rural areas where, if they steered clear of Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube/Google, and started, God forbid, using what, Bing?, would not know what to do with their dependent-on-'liberal'-online-corporations-for-entertainment-and-validation lives.
These complaints resemble those of a child throwing a fit when punished by parents who, having even a modicum of wisdom by virtue of having more years of life experience, have the good sense to reprimand behavior born of ignorance.
Have at it, alt-right children. We, and you, all know that not a single one of you will stop supporting, via your visits and page views, these 'liberal' corporations.
These complaints resemble those of a child throwing a fit when punished by parents who, having even a modicum of wisdom by virtue of having more years of life experience, have the good sense to reprimand behavior born of ignorance.
Have at it, alt-right children. We, and you, all know that not a single one of you will stop supporting, via your visits and page views, these 'liberal' corporations.
15
Private companies should not be forced to propagate right-wing-jihadist propaganda, false, defamatory and offensive language and hateful ideas. Besides, they have the option to create their own hateful.com sites of their own. I am sure extreme alt-left wing hatemongers will congregate there to join the fun too.
I'll stay with the moderate, rational and tolerant middle.
I'll stay with the moderate, rational and tolerant middle.
7
So some political ideas are now "false" and "defamatory"? You call Damore's views "right-wing-jihadist-propaganda," but them to be part of the "moderate, rational and tolerant middle"!? Did you even read your own comment?
Uh, yeah, the idea that women as a group are less competent then men is false and defamatory. It's not a political view, unless you admit that Republican's party platform is that women are less competent than men.
A political view is "single payer healthcare isn't the right solution for our country" or "raising the debt ceiling is bad."
A political view is "single payer healthcare isn't the right solution for our country" or "raising the debt ceiling is bad."
.... The corporations are free to ban whomever they want ... Is a recurring theme in the comments here, except when it's someone who's black or Latina or female or transgender or has a minority religion or a disability ... Then it's a horrible hate crime. Have we as liberals truly betrayed our roots so deeply that we justify censoring the opposition? So far that's gotten us Trump and an armed right wing that thinks we're marching towards genocide, and perhaps our war of words is becoming a campaign to destroy their culture.
11
It is illegal to ban an employee on basis of race, gender etc. They banned an employee whom they perceived as being hostile to other employees and discriminatory on the basis of gender, which the company is legally forbidden to do.
8
I can see you point about a double standard. But I'm personally ok with banning gun promoting, trophy hunting, animal tapping, predator hate and hate sites. They seem to idealize violence.
Do you really not see the difference between the way a person is born (female, black etc.) and a person choosing to be sexist or bigoted?
2
Stress kills men. A Google employee made the unsubstantiated (and false) claim that women are not cut out for tech because, among other reasons, women can't handle stress.
In hiring more women, tech companies may realize they need better project management than "work harder, we have a deadline!" And if they did, the men working there would benefit as well. Stress kills men.
In hiring more women, tech companies may realize they need better project management than "work harder, we have a deadline!" And if they did, the men working there would benefit as well. Stress kills men.
11
I can certainly understand the alt-right's not liking tech. The alt-right depends for its very being on mis-information. By making it harder (and harder, and harder) for hate-mongers who spread things like "pizza-gate" (remember that!) around with reckless abandon, Google, Facebook and other tech companies will cut off the alt-right's life blood.
17
Back home in the UK, the highly respected Queen has been reigning since 1953.
Of course by alt-right "standards", she isn't biologically qualified and is continuing to do a substandard job.
That's why the Donald was so keen to accept her invitation to go there and ride in her far more golden carriage than his.
Of course by alt-right "standards", she isn't biologically qualified and is continuing to do a substandard job.
That's why the Donald was so keen to accept her invitation to go there and ride in her far more golden carriage than his.
13
Have you have lost all shame? An engineer is being fired because he had exercised his free speech and you are talking about alt right? As I understand he had some valid arguments about reducing the quality for political correctness. I think feminists should be outraged when someone suggests that women should be hired over men even if they are inferior in some parameters such as education etc. so while I strongly support diversity, affirmative action based on gender is a slippery slope.
16
Private corporation, not government, ergo, no 1st amendment right ...
14
There's no "free speech" in a private workplace. Alt-right whiners need to learn about the difference between a right and a privilege. They've become accustomed to the notion that they're identical, whereas women and minorities are well aware of the stark differences.
17
I'm not getting why some don't realize that this man WENT VIRAL WITH A 10 PAGE SCREED THAT VIOLATED STATED COMPANY POLICY - which is also an attempt to pressure his employers into complying with his ideas by publicly embarrassing them. If they'd wanted to keep him on, he put them between a rock and a hard place with the public, their stated core values, and the rest of their staff. Of course it backfired. He has the right to say whatever he wants in America, but that does not also mean he had a right to keep his job when he made out of line statements to a vast audience and put his bosses on the spot. A private company does not have to "allow" free speech willy nilly. They have a corporate culture, and if you violate the company rules, then you face the consequences. if he had walked in and slung profanity and racist epithets at coworkers in violation of company policy and gotten fired for that, would we be saying "poor baby, his free speech was violated"? Grow up, people used to understand the difference between free speech in their private lives and work expectations! Were he sincerely trying to make change he could have brought this up diplomatically to a couple of supervisors and they could have weighed the few legitimate points in his sexist tome on their merits.
11
The alt right needs enemies whether it is universities, the media, the high tech industries, renewable energy, or the various groups (minorities, women, Muslims, Latinos, the disabled, LGBT, et al).
They have Trump but Trump is an anomaly and will go down as the worst president in U.S. history as well as mentally deranged and bigoted. Most Americans disapprove of him, his policies, his tweets, and the way he has demeaned the presidency.
Jealousy drives much of this, I suspect. The future is moving on without these people. All the online rants, the tweets, and the hate radio will not slow true progress. These are dogs yapping at a high speed train. They are irrelevant, except for the brief moments when they attract attention.
They have Trump but Trump is an anomaly and will go down as the worst president in U.S. history as well as mentally deranged and bigoted. Most Americans disapprove of him, his policies, his tweets, and the way he has demeaned the presidency.
Jealousy drives much of this, I suspect. The future is moving on without these people. All the online rants, the tweets, and the hate radio will not slow true progress. These are dogs yapping at a high speed train. They are irrelevant, except for the brief moments when they attract attention.
17
If I wrote such a thing in the oil business where I work, for example, that women are poor engineers, or drillers, or whatever, I would be fired on the spot, and justifiably so. Of course women are equally qualified.
Google did exactly the right thing, as evidenced by the fact that all of these "official" waste-of-time big-mouths (e.g. Milos Y.) are scampering to this guys defense. None of these attention-seeking media-junkies have ever had a real job in their life, all being elitist snobs only interesting in promoting their own brand of hate and hate books.
Kudos to Google for not hesitating to call out sexism and divisive mean-spirited behavior. Yes, in the workplace we have to behave respectfully and consider our colleagues.
Google did exactly the right thing, as evidenced by the fact that all of these "official" waste-of-time big-mouths (e.g. Milos Y.) are scampering to this guys defense. None of these attention-seeking media-junkies have ever had a real job in their life, all being elitist snobs only interesting in promoting their own brand of hate and hate books.
Kudos to Google for not hesitating to call out sexism and divisive mean-spirited behavior. Yes, in the workplace we have to behave respectfully and consider our colleagues.
22
Please read the memo before commenting on it. The guy did NOT say that women are poor engineers.
6
Whatever. Google owes this engineer nothing. It's a private company, not the United States of America. They aren't bound by rules to have "freedom of speech and political expression" at work - you have to be socially courteous and appropriate to the culture. Google has non-discrimination rules and the guy broke them by sending out a provocative letter to the whole company rather than bringing up his views discreetly to his supervisors in a dialogue. He knew what he was doing and he knew the risks, to act like a martyr is immature and irresponsible. By taking his ideas public he put the company in a position where they had to discipline or fire him - or face backlash from other employees he'd offended, plus risk other employees coming forward with similar aggressive viewpoints that don't need to be voiced in the workplace. If this guy was on Wall Street and came in to a high level client meeting wearing shorts and flipflops, cursing and smoking weed people would expect he would get fired. Same thing SV style. I'd tell the alt-right to stop being babies, but as everybody knows the lion's share of them are bitter loveless young white males who hang out on 4chan talking smack and playing video games rather than getting jobs. So I can't expect them to understand an adult workplace. I would advise though that if they hate Silicon Valley so much they should boycott all its social media products. Then everyone will be happy.
19
Google invited employees to respond to its diversity policies and issues. Damore responded at length and thoughtfully on an internal bulletin board. He offered some interesting and not-so-interesting ideas about how Google might be more realistic and more effective in trying to reach its diversity goals. The Google leadership response was to symbolically walk him out in front of the other employees and put a symbolic bullet in his head. What kind of culture is supposed to result from that?
12
That's Google's business. They have no obligation to be evenhanded. If I'm invited by my boss to publicly comment on a policy, knowing the culture around me will be anathema to some of my ideas, I'm certainly going to be smart about making my points in a way that will resonate with my audience. Revealing that I think my colleagues may be less competent due to their gender-related inability to handle stress, while knowing those very same colleagues will read it and that my company proffers opposite values as its policy is probably a no-no. If I want to make a point about how desiring diversity must not compromise on everyone meeting the same performance standards, I can certainly say that without disclosing that I don't respect female coworkers or my bosses' ability to gauge their talent. Am I supposed to feel sorry for the guy because he has no social intelligence or common sense? Who writes a 10 page screed in this context anyways? What if his comments had generalized about an ethnic or religious group's predispositions to be poor at some aspect of their jobs? Seriously, it should have been obvious to him that he was risking at least disciplinary action and I daresay that he knew his resume was desirable enough that he decided to do so anyways. He will have no shortage of job options aimed at destroying status quos that offend him anyhow, as he now has an offer to join a hack-the-US-government team at WikiLeaks.
3
"...symbolic bullet in his head?" Dramatize much? Wow. And here I thought all of the "snowflakes" with all of the ultra delicate feelings were the very people detested and vilified by the right wing. So surprising to see one within their own ranks.
1
"Hatreon."
The alt-right can try to spin that in whatever patriotic terms they want, but the name says it all.
The alt-right can try to spin that in whatever patriotic terms they want, but the name says it all.
8
These guys are bullies with sex,religion and family issues who like to hear themselves talk its got nothing to do with democracy its corrupting it. They ought to grow up and contribute positively to society instead of denigrating it.
9
Once again the alt-right shows how little it understands about the rule of law.
12
The question becomes: In a democracy in which equality is fundamental and free speech is an opportunity to promote the positive social cultural dynamics of a community, would someone want to use their voice and related moral authority to denigrate another person based on their gender, racial background, sexual identity, religious affiliation or ethnic background? Or phrased another way: Where is the moral authority to denigrate another person based on any of the above? Free speech maybe a right of our democracy but in and of itself it has no moral authority. Voices who denigrate others actually lack moral authority and seek not to create a sustainable society but are instead destructive to social cohesion. Or as my 6th grade teacher said, In a democracy it is our moral responsibility to protect the rights of those who share that democracy with us. The silicon companies are protecting the rights of all their workers and not just the rights of those who would seek to denigrate their fellow employees.
11
1986 was the first time I ever used a computer and I loved it.. I was never much for conversation, so I thought this is for me. I got my computer science degree in 1994. I was one of four girls in the class, and fifteen guys. I thought that because I was good at one thing that I would always have a job. In 1997 I was hired at a non-profit agency and after 2 years I was promoted to systems administrator. I worked as a systems administrator for 12 years. From the beginning, I always had to prove myself to new male employees, it was like she is a woman and she just doesn't have the brains to do this job. In 2012 I was laid off because of budget cuts
I started looking for a job as a computer support specialist. I probably had 20 interviews, only one of these interviews had a woman. I was never hired. I was so frustrated I actually sent a letter to a conservative radio station here in my town. One of the broadcaster sent me a text and told me that it was probably time to reinvent myself. The first thing that came to mind was "what should I reinvent myself to be, a man" .
If I was a man I would of been hired immediately, but they just assume that since I am a woman that automatically disqualifies me.
I started looking for a job as a computer support specialist. I probably had 20 interviews, only one of these interviews had a woman. I was never hired. I was so frustrated I actually sent a letter to a conservative radio station here in my town. One of the broadcaster sent me a text and told me that it was probably time to reinvent myself. The first thing that came to mind was "what should I reinvent myself to be, a man" .
If I was a man I would of been hired immediately, but they just assume that since I am a woman that automatically disqualifies me.
32
There are also male nurses. That does not mean a male is a better nurse than a female. We are talking about a population matter where if you draw two circles, males and females, there is an area of overlapping. Also, our university is full of left wingers but why there are only 20% female students in computer science? Is that because the colleague admission staff members are all sexist? We have to realize there are racial and gender gap. African american excel almost in all sports. If they get trained in swimming, tennis, or ice hokey I doubt the white and asian have any chance. It is about the genetic difference. So are the females and males. They have different hormones, muscle built, and they should be good at different things. Why dont we just acknowledge that?
4
Maybe the reason that only 20% of females students are in computer science is they get tired of constantly having to prove that they are just as smart as the male students. I realize that we have different hormones and muscle build, but we still have a brain. So are you saying that maybe we should start getting testosterone shots to compete?
6
Ok, sure. As long as we also acknowledge that when different races or genders meet equivalent performance standards at a task that the racial or gender difference should not matter. As long as we also assume that individuals within a race or gender may exceed the expected norm of their group, or attain equivalent performance standards to other groups if given equivalent training, support, and opportunity. In fact, you yourself believe this. You simultaneously state that black athletes are better at everything genetically, while acknowledging that they are not better at everything but if given equivalent training could be. But plenty of highly skilled black athletes are beaten by different races. Try watching the Olympics or the globally beloved sports of soccer and cricket. Biases are also real. Orchestras now have players audition behind a curtain so gender and race is not visible, and they naturally attained more gender and racial diversity based on merit. I think many people who rattle on about natural differences as a way to defend any status quo are just hiding a fear that if all genders and races had equivalent training and access they or their race/gender would fail in a meritocracy. Your comment elegantly illustrates my point.
Oh dear. The right doesn't have sufficient mouthpieces?
9
I think the so-called alt-right will find that by forcing large swaths of American business to "take sides" they are just making it abundantly clear that the majority of Americans will not tolerate bigotry, ignorance and hate, period. Rather than "finding a new punching bag" they are finding more and more resistance from every quarter. Yes, "there is no such thing as neutrality." #resist
11
Silicon Valleys full of liberals? Get a grip, its very very uptight dull place full of the very wealthy now kids with conservative sexist, ageist and values money. Sounds conservative to me.
13
Not sure if conservative is the right word - childish is more like it.
6
Reagan did away with the fairness doctrine when he was president . The alt right luddites are not entitled to equal time. It's time for them to boycott, simply don't buy the products. Go back to stone tablets.
13
Here is the problem with any argument regarding media bias, sexual bias, racial bias, compensation bias, etc. We live in America. Nothing is stoping any of these victims or activists or agitators or children from throwing these unfair toys in the trash and making their own toys. Google was an idea that filled a void. Find your own void and fill it. Stop whining.
9
Some, though not all, of these men are angry because they've failed to make it socially and, most likely, sexually in a society that highly values respect and cooperation among all members in order to continue the species. Damore and others like him may use evolutionary biology to argue for his sexism and sense of superiority but, actually, evolutionary biology argues against him. He may have the brilliance to survive but he lacks the social acuity selected for over thousands of years of evolution to be accepted and successfully pass on his genes.
Just do a search on him and the photos and stories now flooding the Internet speak for themselves. His documented past writing and actions would give any woman or employer pause. The species is now evolving to the point where a man needs far more empathy and sensitivity to others than simply a genius-level brain to be accepted into the community and attract a suitable mate.
He and men like him arguing against women's full inclusion in all aspects of society are themselves biology textbook examples of why they're now being segregated into social "ghettos" and shunned by the community. That is biology in action and all this ugly tantrumming will only win them Darwin Awards.
Just do a search on him and the photos and stories now flooding the Internet speak for themselves. His documented past writing and actions would give any woman or employer pause. The species is now evolving to the point where a man needs far more empathy and sensitivity to others than simply a genius-level brain to be accepted into the community and attract a suitable mate.
He and men like him arguing against women's full inclusion in all aspects of society are themselves biology textbook examples of why they're now being segregated into social "ghettos" and shunned by the community. That is biology in action and all this ugly tantrumming will only win them Darwin Awards.
30
Your work is paying for your mouth. It's perfectly appropriate for them to put limits on what comes out of it as you represent them.
9
Amen, Moses.
I'll believe there's "conspiracy" of left-wingers in Silicon Valley when Twitter does something about the bots and right wing trolls and Nazis.
20
Amen.
Why is "liberal" bias the only bad bias. What about the "right wing" bias of oil companies, big pharma and corporate America in general.
Aren't liberals entitled to their opinions? The alt-right extolls the "Freedoms we enjoy" until somone they don't agree with tries to exercuse them.
Aren't liberals entitled to their opinions? The alt-right extolls the "Freedoms we enjoy" until somone they don't agree with tries to exercuse them.
32
why doesn't everyone, left and right, just try critical thinking? It's like the truth, It will set us free.
1
I suggest the Times look up the science of discrimination instead of polling biased opinions from activists. As an economist, I can tell you that the evidence for discrimination, in particular, gender discrimination, is weak. The economics literature is bursting with new findings of how gender differences in preferences can explain pay and work disparities. See "A Grand Gender Convergence: Its Last Chapter by Claudia Goldin" for example. As to the psychology literature which purports to show discrimination, its a troubled pseudoscientific field, riven with methodological issues, ideological biases, and outright fraud, not a science.
5
While I don't agree with the findings in the research you linked, I appreciate that you took time to at least present evidence.
Simply making sexist statements with no evidence, just opinion, to back it up was what got your man fired.
Simply making sexist statements with no evidence, just opinion, to back it up was what got your man fired.
2
NY Magazine's "Science of Us" (like Discover Magazine) covered this extensively earlier this year. With respect to the current implicit bias fad, it turns out there are serious methodological problems with the underlying science. Problems with both the reliability (i.e., are the research results replicable each time with the same people); and the validity (i.e., do the tests actually measure what they purport to measure). The concept has been hyped and widely embraced in universities and for workplace diversity training sessions without the general public necessarily understanding the severe limitations. Best to just judge each person as an individual and not buy into these vast social narratives, no matter which side of the political aisle is pushing them!
3
Much of the pay gap is indeed due to differences in occupation mix, BUT, that raises the question of why people choose their occupations and why occupations that are traditionally female pay less - paid less because it's women's work or paid less because the same characteristics that attracted women to those jobs also elicit lower pay? I believe there are some studies that focus on occupational pay but can't recall any now. However, I have seen enough cases of men and women who shy away from particular majors/professions because of stereotypes, fear of not being accepted, being steered away.
My recollection of recent work by Goldin was that she had demonstrated a larger pay gap than I had calculated in the 1990s (CPS MORG data from 1980s) but she used more recent data, different source, maybe slightly different methodology. I also recall an article in the 1990s describing how some MIT professors who didn't initially believe there was discrimination in their departments conducted their own small study (can't recall which dept. - ecoomics, an earth science) and to their surprise, after taking into account all individual differences, concluded that using obejctive criteria, the women were being promoted (position, chair pay, tenure) more slowly than the men.
My recollection of recent work by Goldin was that she had demonstrated a larger pay gap than I had calculated in the 1990s (CPS MORG data from 1980s) but she used more recent data, different source, maybe slightly different methodology. I also recall an article in the 1990s describing how some MIT professors who didn't initially believe there was discrimination in their departments conducted their own small study (can't recall which dept. - ecoomics, an earth science) and to their surprise, after taking into account all individual differences, concluded that using obejctive criteria, the women were being promoted (position, chair pay, tenure) more slowly than the men.
5
There are scientists who push Intelligent Design. Their numbers may be few, but their backers make themselves heard around the galaxy.
This firing is not about one person's opinion. This is not about a difference of whether using a C++ Template is better than simply using an Abstract Class. For those who know what this means.
This person has a deep and overt bias towards female engineers. He is likely to NOT work well with female colleagues. If he were promoted, it is highly likely he would never assign important work to female engineers, nor would he hire them or mentor them to promote them. If I were his boss, I would either reassign him to a "closet office" or fire him. He will NOT be working well with my other employees.
Do we want a Lt. Col. commanding an Air Wing to ignore the input of a female pilot? Whose input may impact operational safety and mission parameters? If not, why would we want a male employee who would refuse to work with a female peer at a professional level? Which could adversely impact everyone's ability to achieve the goals set forth by his managers, directors, VPs and CEOs?
This has nothing to do with First Amendment right. It is about getting the job done right.
This firing is not about one person's opinion. This is not about a difference of whether using a C++ Template is better than simply using an Abstract Class. For those who know what this means.
This person has a deep and overt bias towards female engineers. He is likely to NOT work well with female colleagues. If he were promoted, it is highly likely he would never assign important work to female engineers, nor would he hire them or mentor them to promote them. If I were his boss, I would either reassign him to a "closet office" or fire him. He will NOT be working well with my other employees.
Do we want a Lt. Col. commanding an Air Wing to ignore the input of a female pilot? Whose input may impact operational safety and mission parameters? If not, why would we want a male employee who would refuse to work with a female peer at a professional level? Which could adversely impact everyone's ability to achieve the goals set forth by his managers, directors, VPs and CEOs?
This has nothing to do with First Amendment right. It is about getting the job done right.
12
Multiple forces oppose the alt-right. They include science, good-sportsmanship, separation of church and state, non-violent civil disobedience, feminism, data-driven analysis (as distinct from ideology-driven polemics), and, yes, political correctness. The alt-right is among the worst things to come along in my lifetime, and I'm 67+ years old.
11
Oh please, let's not make a messiah out of Google, this is the same company that bowed to the Chinese government to stop people from free access to the Internet. Money talks, loud and clear.
7
Google did exactly the opposite! Google the fact first please.
- a Chinese who grew up using Google and later lost it for several years
(Those years were unbeatable)
- a Chinese who grew up using Google and later lost it for several years
(Those years were unbeatable)
3
I'm sorry, but there are a lot of so called "right wing views'"that are completely divorced from reality. Not to mention that a number of their views are wrapped up in a male white superiority, and not really conducive to a modern diverse work force. And I experience these views withing my own family, making conversation rather tough when they start spouting nonsense with racial overtones.
19
as Americans, we should be tolerant of all things - except two:
1. the advocacy of hatred.
2. Intolerance itself.
The alt-right embodies both.
1. the advocacy of hatred.
2. Intolerance itself.
The alt-right embodies both.
36
Google played right into the hands of the those opposing "progressivism," by firing the author of the memo. It was the worst possible thing they could have done. Rather than fighting ideas with ideas, they basically sent a message of progressive intolerance.
10
Another perspective on this: He was fired because he severely damaged the company's brand. In 2017, employees still don't know the First Amendment doesn't extend to the private workplace.
I read the screed. It was filled with assertions and claims. Not one piece of evidence was cited for the author's opinions, nor were any examples given to support the claims he made. Nor did he address statistics that show the company's employees are overwhelmingly male and white. (Fact: 69% of Google employees are White. 60% are male. Only 2% of Google employees are Black, according to data compiled from company reports.)
But the Damore would have still been employed if his "manifesto" had remained in house. The minute it hurt the brand, he had to go. I'm sure if he looked at his employment contract, he would have seen the clause that gave them the right to fire him.
I read the screed. It was filled with assertions and claims. Not one piece of evidence was cited for the author's opinions, nor were any examples given to support the claims he made. Nor did he address statistics that show the company's employees are overwhelmingly male and white. (Fact: 69% of Google employees are White. 60% are male. Only 2% of Google employees are Black, according to data compiled from company reports.)
But the Damore would have still been employed if his "manifesto" had remained in house. The minute it hurt the brand, he had to go. I'm sure if he looked at his employment contract, he would have seen the clause that gave them the right to fire him.
15
I don't think so. Google relies on peer review and supervisor's evaluations for advancement. They can't keep this guy on board when he has an explicit bias against women.
4
Nope! He cost Google undetermined amounts of money by undermining its reputation and, as another poster noted, its hard-won brand. Google actually solidified its brand by during this miscreant. Kudos, Google!
5
I'll believe these guys the moment an enraged cis-gendered, multi-racial Wiccan QOS specialist assassinates a resentful jobless WWCM as he's leaving the corner tavern.
Until then, just more cries of false equivalence.
Until then, just more cries of false equivalence.
4
What has alt-right invented over past 3 centuries?
Except ways to keep us uneducated, slave and backwards and Fake news of their own not to mention lie=alternate truth.
Except ways to keep us uneducated, slave and backwards and Fake news of their own not to mention lie=alternate truth.
13
Seriously, P2. Have you read any history books? How do you determined whether historical figures were left or right? Was George Washington a leftist? Was Einstein? Was Leonardo Da Vinci? Pleeease!
1
The "alt-right" is appealing to young males who feel the left offers nothing for them. Their message is simple: the left is authoritative, has no sense of humor, and requires a politically correct way of thinking and talking. They frame the culture war with left being the "establishment" and the "alt-right" as "counter-culture."
But my question is: if you agree any part of the memo or that Mr. Damore should not have been fired, are you part of the "alt-right?" Because according to some media outlets, you are.
But my question is: if you agree any part of the memo or that Mr. Damore should not have been fired, are you part of the "alt-right?" Because according to some media outlets, you are.
8
I am definitely neither alt-left (progressive) nor alt-right. I think the memo was stupid, but I strongly believe in the memo writer's right to discuss openly such matters, as wrong as he is, in an INTERNAL forum. Turning the author into a martyr of misogynists was the worse possible outcome and showed a total lack of leadership at Google. Fight words with words, ideas with ideas, not with firing and alt-left intolerance.
7
Urban society is more diverse so culture in the urban areas has moved on except for groups of resentful holdouts.
In essence, the alt-right is counter-culture now in urban areas. They want a return to the white male based society that still exists in rural areas but not in urban areas.
They are using all out war tactics in all venues. For them, how they win doesn't matter so long as they do win. So we have political protests at places of employment and on business premises where they are customers. They target urban diverse culture wherever it exists. They deliberately work to portray themselves as martyrs and victims.
However, I have noticed that high profile victims like Damore rarely suffer financially afterwards. They win a consevative lottery which awards them with financial support from donations made by the alt-right base. A type of consevative "welfare"--based on voluntary donations rather than taxes. They are very generous to privileged white male "victims" and to females who support white male rule.
It is a shame they are not more generous to poor unemployed whites who lack the privileges they enjoy. When poor whites ask for a living wage they reject them as lazy, selfish, greedy, and unworthy.
In essence, the alt-right is counter-culture now in urban areas. They want a return to the white male based society that still exists in rural areas but not in urban areas.
They are using all out war tactics in all venues. For them, how they win doesn't matter so long as they do win. So we have political protests at places of employment and on business premises where they are customers. They target urban diverse culture wherever it exists. They deliberately work to portray themselves as martyrs and victims.
However, I have noticed that high profile victims like Damore rarely suffer financially afterwards. They win a consevative lottery which awards them with financial support from donations made by the alt-right base. A type of consevative "welfare"--based on voluntary donations rather than taxes. They are very generous to privileged white male "victims" and to females who support white male rule.
It is a shame they are not more generous to poor unemployed whites who lack the privileges they enjoy. When poor whites ask for a living wage they reject them as lazy, selfish, greedy, and unworthy.
4
No, you are not. The media, by necessity (word limits on stories) and to sell papers, is generally reductionist and over-simplifies to generate "narratives." Also, because the mammalian human mind has evolved over the millennia to embrace narratives. We are a story-telling species who want to find patterns and make connections because this helped us survive. Also, for purposes of survival, we are evolved to both be social and cooperative but also to distinguish between in and out groups. So it helps a narrative if there is an in and out group and conflict between the two and to label people as belonging to one or the other. Whether storyteller is Breitbart or the NY Times. NY Times generally does nuance better (they certainly used to) but they have their own slant. Cathy Young, who wrote an opinion in USA Today examining the memo and agreeing with large parts of it, is probably not "alt-right." The four university professors/scientists interviewed by Quillette that mostly agree with the Damore memo are probably not "alt-right." Read the memo in full and decide for yourself. Don't let the media label you. You do you.
1
What conversative, white nationalists call "pervasive, industrywide liberal bias", I call fair-minded, inclusive, conscientious, compassionate and inoffensive.
Call me liberal, proudly.
Call me liberal, proudly.
29
Freedom of speech and association is protected left and alt right but not as a representative within a corporate entity utilizing a proprietary platform. If you don't like Gimbel's go to Macy's. Alt rightists yearn for their share of the circus audience where they've been in none of the three rings but merely a sideshow headed by an orange haired combover clown.
5
Try not to use GOOGLE or one of the other companies they own for one week, bet you can't. This whole thing means nothing. I love that the right gets to join libs in yelling about an issue that will disappear from all our memories before the weekend arrives. The Right just might be even more sensitive than the left, now we need the leaders of our party to figure out how we turn this around, the GOP has been beating us at this game for years. Figure it out, or you WILL get 45 for 71/2 more years
And why have we all agreed to call a small group of ignorant bigots the "alt-right"?
9
I find the Times's use of the term "conservative" to describe these far-right, hate-filled activists objectionable. Let's be clear what they are: reactionary, extremist and, in some cases, violent.
14
I need to take issue with the statement, "It’s a tech company’s right, of course, to bar whomever it wishes." I remember when Denny's got in hot water for denying service to black patrons. I think if tech starts to deny service to whole categories of citizens who are not violating any laws, it spells big trouble.
6
They are not denying service to anyone,, but instead setting standards for their company.
8
Damore was an employee of Google, not a customer. Employers have rules. They have always had them. Employees like Damore do not get to use company resources for their own political soap box. If I tried to promote unions at IBM when I worked there (a left agenda), I would have been fired. Damore, with his right agenda, would also have been fired at IBM, even though much of IBM was conservative.
4
False equivalence. Denny's black patrons were not violating Denny's dress codes or acceptable codes of public behavior, they just were of a different race. The law says Google can't discriminate based on gender, religion or race. It may even say that it cannot discriminate based on political party affiliation. It does not say that ergo Google has to let employees say or do anything they want, especially in a public forum about other employees.
3
Could I talk about Marxism as a Google employee? Can I talk for a union? Can I support the contract workers organizing? Can I question why American blacks don't get hired?
Lots of ideas are not permitted in corporate America. Just read about the Red Scare. The Alt-Right acts like entitled white guys.
Lots of ideas are not permitted in corporate America. Just read about the Red Scare. The Alt-Right acts like entitled white guys.
6
Unfortunately there are no public forums, all the important spaces are corporate controlled. Does this mean that the first amendment is inoperative on a technicality?
4
Not just entitled, victimized. Just like Trump is going to find out which white males have were discriminated against by affirmative action.
2
Why don't the alt-right people make their own silicon valley company? It's amazing how they think that they have a "right" to a company's services and facilities.
7
If the so called 'Alt-right' is wants a fight, with Silicon Valley, good luck. It's a fight that will loose...
7
Google has far too much censoring power. As just one more scary example that is not even mentioned in this article, it was announced recently that NYT would use Google's so-called "machine learning" app to screen comments for inappropriateness.
And the problem is that Google does not exactly have an accurate track record in detecting hard to detect events with their "machine learning" which is undoubtedly contaminated by human bias and error. For example, their much hyped Google Flu Trends was ultimately shown to be unreliable in highly critical articles published in Nature by the scientific community. For example, one article published in Nature in 2013 'When Google Got Flu Wrong' showed that Google's detection ability was much less accurate than traditional flu surveillance. To stop the public embarrassment, Google finally terminated this Flu Trends app a couple of years ago.
They apparently learned from that experience, so their app that detects "inappropriate comments" for NYT is a complete black box with no scientific review and no public accountability that I have seen.
I would speculate that detecting "inappropriate comments" is far more difficult than detecting flu outbreaks, especially given the subtlety of language and the influence of conscious and unconscious bias in our current political climate.
And the problem is that Google does not exactly have an accurate track record in detecting hard to detect events with their "machine learning" which is undoubtedly contaminated by human bias and error. For example, their much hyped Google Flu Trends was ultimately shown to be unreliable in highly critical articles published in Nature by the scientific community. For example, one article published in Nature in 2013 'When Google Got Flu Wrong' showed that Google's detection ability was much less accurate than traditional flu surveillance. To stop the public embarrassment, Google finally terminated this Flu Trends app a couple of years ago.
They apparently learned from that experience, so their app that detects "inappropriate comments" for NYT is a complete black box with no scientific review and no public accountability that I have seen.
I would speculate that detecting "inappropriate comments" is far more difficult than detecting flu outbreaks, especially given the subtlety of language and the influence of conscious and unconscious bias in our current political climate.
11
Maybe, but the consequences are also far less severe. NYTimes has been screening comments for appropriateness for years (which is why it's one of the few comments sections on the web not dominated by spleen and ALL CAPS!!!). Can machines do as good a job of figuring out the context of offensive terms and phrases? Not yet. But it's not clear the loss is a substantial one in terms of rights or expressions of different opinions.
Also, you don't need to see into a black box to test its efficacy. We can study how effective Google's black box is by using multiple human testers as controls, then looking at Google's rates of type one and two errors.
Also, you don't need to see into a black box to test its efficacy. We can study how effective Google's black box is by using multiple human testers as controls, then looking at Google's rates of type one and two errors.
4
It's not censorship unless the government does it.
Anyone that disagrees with liberals is part of the alt-right. Thank you for guaranteeing Republicans will keep control of the country
27
Women are exhausted from alpha biased-male driven ideology that we are not capable to equal or excel at a male-dominated careers. It is not the Democrats who stir the pot, but small-minded men, largely comprised of the GOP who think it is fine to marginalize women. Congrats to Google in terminating this misogynist, who set women back to cave men days. The Alt-Right is upset over his termination, but have no issue in terminating women for any reason they deem fit.
7
Silicon Valley isn't liberal, it's libertarian. They don't care about your social life, they aren't interested in our wombs, but neither do they want to pay their fair share of taxes nor send their children to the same public schools that we of the 99% might.
And good luck with boycotting Google services, ha ha ha!!!
And good luck with boycotting Google services, ha ha ha!!!
17
Rather than "alt-right", "Crypto-fascist" is more accurate.
12
There is no such thing as neutrality in the progress of our species. When hearts, souls, minds, and company policies support kindness, justice and equity, and when they do not tolerate degradation and stereotyping..........well, they are part of the progress. Let the bigots live under rocks or create their own industries, but they should not poison the rest of us. Calling out bigots is not equivalent to bigotry. There is no reason whatsoever to capitulate to racist, homophobic, and sexist belief systems. They are destructive.
I am happy to support those companies who espouse high value systems.
I am happy to support those companies who espouse high value systems.
14
The alt-right already have the support of the Koch brothers and the US Supreme Court ........
2
....what more do they need or want. They can use those two resources to force their views on the rest of us. That and gerrymandering and voter suppression.
The thoughts of the alt-right are so vicious, ugly, slanderous, and outright antisocial, why should any organization be obliged to tolerate alt-rightists -- let's be honest and call these jokers what they are, wannabe-Nazis -- when they attempt to spew their garbage, expecting in the process to gain adherents or at least savage these institutions that spurn their self-righteous, but actually quite scurrilous ideologies. This time the alt-right Nazi's have bitten off a bit more than they intended, however. If the press were to stop shining the spotlight their way, they would evaporate in a moment. Now they're going to have to play hardball with some of the smartest people on the earth. Will such brutishness ever overcome the Valley's remarkable collective intellect, shared ethics and social values, and capacity for innovation? No.
10
PLEASE stop using the sanitized term "alt-right." You need to use "White Supremacists" in every headline and every mention of these people. Do not participate in their attempt to "re-brand" their hate
34
You're right, why make any attempt at nuance at all anymore... For example, by actually reading James Damore's "manifesto." I think you will find it quite clear headed, researched and non-inflamatory.
8
Making preferential room in any organization for well qualified people who have been the historic target of discrimination - institutional or casual - is wonderful thing.
Wealthy donors to Republicans get preferential treatment all the time.
So, what's the problem with preference or helpful treatment?
Well considered, healthy doses of liberal bias is the antidote for fascism.
Real Americans hate fascists.
Wealthy donors to Republicans get preferential treatment all the time.
So, what's the problem with preference or helpful treatment?
Well considered, healthy doses of liberal bias is the antidote for fascism.
Real Americans hate fascists.
14
Good luck fighting a tide, alt right folks. It's technically and behaviorally impossible to supplant twitter or Google. Even Rush Limbaugh is an Apple fan. You can't boycott a service that your own messiah uses. And it's patronizing to Google to suggest you can live without them.
4
Yahoo thought that alta vista would never be supplanted. There is always someone at Stanford (or MIT or Berkeley) coming up with something better. All tech companies as they amass power become arrogant, and thus their Achilles' heel becomes exposed. (And, I'm not alt-right.)
3
A war between Silicon Valley and the hate-fringe of the alt right? Let's see, who has the advantage here? Those who created the internet, or those who are basically parasites on that creation?
16
When the Left criticizes a business or corporation for their anti-gay/woman/minority bias the Alt-Right tell the Left to stay out of a company's business. They tell us that the company has the right to their conservative views and actions. But when the shoe is on the other foot, the Alt-Right feels free to attack any business with a leftward focus. Alt-Right people are hypocrites.
9
Wait....
Aren't these (alt-right/white pride) the folks who think money is the same as free speech??
Or does that only hold true for speech that they like??
Aren't these (alt-right/white pride) the folks who think money is the same as free speech??
Or does that only hold true for speech that they like??
4
The beautiful thing about free speech is that eventually the voice of reason is heard. Slowly but surely Americans are moving towards becoming a country where anyone can live their version of the American dream without worrying about their lifestyle choices getting them killed. For a very long time if you weren't a white Protestant you struggled in this country.
We're reaching a tipping point where the majority now believe that as long as you're doing nothing criminal it doesn't matter what race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation you are. You are free to be as successful as you're capable of being provided you are willing to work for it. Companies recognize that our country has become more diverse and they've responded accordingly by prizing diversity and intellectual curiosity.
The right has always insisted that the free markets will decide what ideas win or lose in this country. They're finally on the losing end because enough of us are able to recognize that a country based on exclusion isn't the country we want to have.
These alt right beliefs will always be among us but thankfully they're finally being pushed to the outside edges of our society. Perhaps that's the blessing that will come from the Trump presidency. He's brought our ugliness to the surface and now we're working to address it. Good ideas thrive and bad ideas are sent to the dustbin of history to die.
We're reaching a tipping point where the majority now believe that as long as you're doing nothing criminal it doesn't matter what race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation you are. You are free to be as successful as you're capable of being provided you are willing to work for it. Companies recognize that our country has become more diverse and they've responded accordingly by prizing diversity and intellectual curiosity.
The right has always insisted that the free markets will decide what ideas win or lose in this country. They're finally on the losing end because enough of us are able to recognize that a country based on exclusion isn't the country we want to have.
These alt right beliefs will always be among us but thankfully they're finally being pushed to the outside edges of our society. Perhaps that's the blessing that will come from the Trump presidency. He's brought our ugliness to the surface and now we're working to address it. Good ideas thrive and bad ideas are sent to the dustbin of history to die.
16
Perfectly said.
1
Yes, the world conquering American tech industry, pillar of our economy and essential center of future growth, is heavily liberal. As others have said, the Alt Right should stop whining and take their business elsewhere.
1
Um, if there was a liberal bias in tech, I'm pretty sure there'd be a lot more women and darker-hued skintones in management, especially upper management. As it is . . . . well, there's a bias, all right, and it ain't left.
6
Unfortunately there are plenty of progressives who are equally or more misogynistic than their alt-right counterparts. They just don't say those things in front of women.
7
Hard as it is for me to remember, the "alt-right" is a small vocal group. The vast majority of Americans are not on their side nor share their values. Good for Google and many of the other Silicon Valley companies for their humane values.
We must remain vigilant, however and well informed because as we know Hitler's Brown-shirt gangs were also a small vocal group!
We must remain vigilant, however and well informed because as we know Hitler's Brown-shirt gangs were also a small vocal group!
3
You got the right. Then the religious right and now the alt right. Just how many Right's do these people think they need? what A GrOuP.
4
Alt-Right should boycott all those "liberal" silicon valley companies and run their own alternatives. No Android or iOS cellphones. No facebook, youtube, google, gofundme, etc. Their "Alt-Right" alternative companies are bound to be bigly successful.
4
Things are really starting to go in the opposite direction these days. We have the liberals looking to shut people up all the sudden instead of calling for understanding and we have the conservatives standing up for frree speech. The world is changing right before our eyes and I'm not clear about how and why its occurring now. But it is. This article is just one example.
9
You misunderstand what's going on. I'll ignore the fact that Damore's case has nothing to do with free speech.
I've never seen anyone on the far right stand up for free speech. For example, when Black Lives Matter was protesting in Baltimore, I remember many columnists on the right advocating shutting them down. The right isn't standing up for a principle so much as they're claiming victimhood. This is a new meme for them, and they're always searching for new enemies to energize their base.
The first amendment protects speech in the public square. It doesn't protect speech anywhere else. Every corporation has the right to define its own standards. Damore isn't a victim of intolerance--in fact, he exemplifies intolerance. He's a victim of violating his company's code of conduct. (He's also a victim of lying on his application.)
I've never seen anyone on the far right stand up for free speech. For example, when Black Lives Matter was protesting in Baltimore, I remember many columnists on the right advocating shutting them down. The right isn't standing up for a principle so much as they're claiming victimhood. This is a new meme for them, and they're always searching for new enemies to energize their base.
The first amendment protects speech in the public square. It doesn't protect speech anywhere else. Every corporation has the right to define its own standards. Damore isn't a victim of intolerance--in fact, he exemplifies intolerance. He's a victim of violating his company's code of conduct. (He's also a victim of lying on his application.)
3
Unless you haven't been paying attention the alt-right has started their attack.
If you need an example of what I am talking about, just read the scores of responses, overwhelmingly from men, who responded to the first article in this series with non-scientific and junk science comments and then the other scores of men responding to this article with the mime that the workplace in Silicon Valley and high-tech is a liberal la-la land.
But, I guess these men haven't read the recent news about a very prominent high-tech CEO who was forced to resign because he turned his company into a misogynist swampland.
Nor have these clueless men read any of the scores of news articles in recent years that have shown that high-tech is not exactly a liberal welcoming place if you happen to be a woman.
But, like Donald Trump's base, these men will sadly stick to their views, despite the evidence to the contrary, which is why any reputable high-tech company must have a code of conduct in place that promotes diversity and combats sexual harassment in a male-dominated workplace where far to many of these male workers still think it is the 1950s.
If you need an example of what I am talking about, just read the scores of responses, overwhelmingly from men, who responded to the first article in this series with non-scientific and junk science comments and then the other scores of men responding to this article with the mime that the workplace in Silicon Valley and high-tech is a liberal la-la land.
But, I guess these men haven't read the recent news about a very prominent high-tech CEO who was forced to resign because he turned his company into a misogynist swampland.
Nor have these clueless men read any of the scores of news articles in recent years that have shown that high-tech is not exactly a liberal welcoming place if you happen to be a woman.
But, like Donald Trump's base, these men will sadly stick to their views, despite the evidence to the contrary, which is why any reputable high-tech company must have a code of conduct in place that promotes diversity and combats sexual harassment in a male-dominated workplace where far to many of these male workers still think it is the 1950s.
9
The alt-right is as irrational and idiotic as ever. On one hand they promote the rights of business to do as it pleases (e.g. bakers refusing to sell product to homosexuals) and then, when their stated position goes against them, they whine about persecution (e.g. business taking action against employees who are discussing non-job issues while on the job).
At work, there is no 1st Amendment right to free speech. Never was and shouldn't be. The only exception is whistle blowing and with that is the risk that 'crying wolf' is punishable.
Alt-right snowflakes, grow-up !
At work, there is no 1st Amendment right to free speech. Never was and shouldn't be. The only exception is whistle blowing and with that is the risk that 'crying wolf' is punishable.
Alt-right snowflakes, grow-up !
18
Since the alt-right is also known as the know-nothing party, it is hardly surprising that they are against the intellectual giants that have made Silicon Valley the haven that it has become.
12
"But by forcing these companies to take sides in an emerging culture war, these activists have already achieved a kind of perverse goal. They have found a new punching bag, and they have proved that in the hyper-polarized Trump era, there is no such thing as neutrality."
There hasn't been neutrality in the media ever. What these folks are doing are making it obvious, for all to see.
There hasn't been neutrality in the media ever. What these folks are doing are making it obvious, for all to see.
6
G. Randolph Hearst did that 150 years ago.
2
Of course Silicon Valley has a liberal bias. Because despite what "great Republican" and conservative minds somehow believe, the Universe is not 6,000 years old, science and data are real, and magical thinking doesn't work.
Sheesh. Where are all the adults in politics? And in business?
Sheesh. Where are all the adults in politics? And in business?
32
Not really. Silicon Valley is the most wealth judgmental culture in the US.
1
Thank you, Jack.
Believing that the universe is 6,000 years old is as scientifically sound as saying that women can be men or vice versa. In other words, that chromosomes XX =XY. Please! Seriously, no conservative believes that the universe is 6,000 years old! Boy, don't be so biased!!
There is unquestionably a very obvious liberal bias in tech. With more and more essential activities taking place online, the platforms we use should not have such a clear ideological orientation, nor the power to ban users with whom they disagree. There needs to be some sort of government protection of free speech in these new 'civic spaces.'
5
It's not liberals' fault that today they're the only ones confident enough in their own philosophy to be able to take science into account, including what science has proven regarding gender differences ...
And every private sector company has the right to choose to respect science and proven facts or not. The most thriving companies in Silicon Valley today are those who do, which shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.
If you still want to spread lies because you strongly believe them, that's perfectly fine. You'll be able to express those opinion on no matter what discussion forum, whether it's Breitbart's forum or the NYT comment section ...
And every private sector company has the right to choose to respect science and proven facts or not. The most thriving companies in Silicon Valley today are those who do, which shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.
If you still want to spread lies because you strongly believe them, that's perfectly fine. You'll be able to express those opinion on no matter what discussion forum, whether it's Breitbart's forum or the NYT comment section ...
5
There tens of billions of "civic spaces" on the Net, with hundreds of thousands such spaces created or mutated each week. Not enough yet?
5
So now conservatives want government to interfere with a private business. If there is a obvious liberal bias at Google or Twitter or Patreon there is a very obvious, Constitutionally protected means of voicing your displeasure with that. Don't use their services. Google is not the public square and has no requirement to offer you a platform for your ideology, whatever that may be. If they find something that you post goes against their standards they have every right to delete the post or go so far as to revoke the users privileges. As does Breitbart, as does InfoWars as does Stormfront.
If you feel your ideological views are not being served, or you wish to only associate with people and consume content that fits into your world view then start your own social network.
If you feel your ideological views are not being served, or you wish to only associate with people and consume content that fits into your world view then start your own social network.
1
Back in the 80's, most of the Silicon Valley venture capitalists I met with, were all staunchly Republican, and wanted all manufacturing to be in China for the labor cost savings.
7
Tell us more about what the world was like decades before the internet, Grampa!
1
Seems like the alt-right is whining that it is losing in the "marketplace of ideas."
22
The best part is that the alt-right will have to "Google" the address of the Google office in order to know where to protest.
14
Wait, PayPal and Google, which are run by libertarians, are supposedly censoring conservatives? Eh?
What many folks do not seem to realize is that Silicon Valley bigwigs supported Trump and are known for their less-than socialist attitudes.
Just ask Peter Thiel.
What many folks do not seem to realize is that Silicon Valley bigwigs supported Trump and are known for their less-than socialist attitudes.
Just ask Peter Thiel.
5
This wasn't and isn't generally the case.
6
I didn't know that Breitbart published all views. oh ya, they don't. they have no ethics or sense of fairness.
32
I wouldn't say that.
As an Independent, I've been able to have a lot of conversations at the BB discussion forum, even though on many issues I didn't agree with them.
They only blocked me when at a certain moment I was ill and wrote posts explaining why an article written by their "science editor" (in real life not a scientist at all, but a professional fiction writer ...) was totally false and one big lie for two entire days ... .
But for months, they allowed me to express my opinions, even when they were diametrically opposed to their editorials.
That's not the point here, however. Google is NOT a private sector company trying to provide news and as a consequence having a discussion forum. It's a tech company, that prioritizes respecting science. What the employee that was just fired did was forgetting that his job was NOT to express his own, ill-informed opinions or to start a debate AT his workplace about it.
He could easily have done so elsewhere (for instance in an op-ed for the NYT). Instead, he decided to reject the work ethics that the managing board of this private business decided to adopt. All employees have the right to do so, but that means that you're fired ... because "private" means free to choose how to organize and run your business, which includes the freedom to want to respect science on gender issues ...
As an Independent, I've been able to have a lot of conversations at the BB discussion forum, even though on many issues I didn't agree with them.
They only blocked me when at a certain moment I was ill and wrote posts explaining why an article written by their "science editor" (in real life not a scientist at all, but a professional fiction writer ...) was totally false and one big lie for two entire days ... .
But for months, they allowed me to express my opinions, even when they were diametrically opposed to their editorials.
That's not the point here, however. Google is NOT a private sector company trying to provide news and as a consequence having a discussion forum. It's a tech company, that prioritizes respecting science. What the employee that was just fired did was forgetting that his job was NOT to express his own, ill-informed opinions or to start a debate AT his workplace about it.
He could easily have done so elsewhere (for instance in an op-ed for the NYT). Instead, he decided to reject the work ethics that the managing board of this private business decided to adopt. All employees have the right to do so, but that means that you're fired ... because "private" means free to choose how to organize and run your business, which includes the freedom to want to respect science on gender issues ...
7
I work for a huge multinational organization and it wouldn't matter what the content was, if I sent a 10 page manifesto to all 40K of my fellow employees I'd be lucky to still have a job the next day. :D
4
but that isn't what happened here
Just to be clear, companies like Hobby Lobby do not have to include birth control coverage in their insurance packages due to religious objection but Airbnb should have to rent venues to white supremacists? laughable. I think the Alt-right should take their business elsewhere. Perhaps they should start their own bigot-friendly businesses and see how that fares in the public marketplace. Capitalism, am I right?
194
I find it sad but predictable that The Times feels compelled to associate Damore's memo with the far right, akin to how Fox used to associate Obama with socialism. The reason his memo is striking a nerve is that, in addition to being well-written, it dares raise the issue of sex differences as a possible explanation for why there has never been and never will be a 50/50 distribution of men and women in all professions and positions. That is an honest conversation that deserves an honest forum, not marginalization by media thought-police.
18
It's actually not that well-written. It's a lot of pseudo-academic mumbo jumbo, which the author hopes will obscure his scientifically-disproven - and flat out misogynistic- thesis. I have no problem discussing why women may or may not be successful in STEM fields, but to attribute it to women's tendency towards "neuroticism" is laughable.
30
His memo attributes the scarcity of women techies to biological differences between the sexes, including the "fact" that women are afflicted by neurosis and can't handle stress. The whole piece contributes nothing to an "honest forum" --unless of course you agree with him that women are too hysterical to program computers. BTW, the Times was reporting on the REACTION of the alt-right to this story. It's called "the news." Do you want them to ignore it?
6
It's neither well-written nor science. They should have fired him for being inarticulate.
2
Fine. Let the alt-right create their own companies. If they don't like the company they work at, they're free to leave it. That's the way it's been forever.
12
The worst thing about this fight for me is that my side is on the wrong side of science. Inherited psychological differences between the sexes- with overlap of course and cultural factors quickly entering in- are as real as climate change, and denial of either is ideological, not factually based. Like with all primates, there are differences between the sexes in humans. To not accept that is to embrace some form of Creationism, albeit not the biblical one. If you accept the slow process of evolution and the natural selection of traits and dispositions that facilitate survival and passing on of genes. this process has to also apply to gender.
I am a Bernie type lefty, have been for many decades, and an equality feminist. One can be against sexist discrimination and misogyny without having to deny reality or accept the Social Darwinism that is a distortion of Darwinian thought and current evolutionary views, and is used to rationalism racism and male supremacy.
May I suggest the following book: "Whose Afraid of Charles Darwin?: Debating Feminism and Evolutionary Theory," by Griet Vandermassen, a feminist who became a biologist. She didn't discard feminism, but just integrated it with reality.
I am a Bernie type lefty, have been for many decades, and an equality feminist. One can be against sexist discrimination and misogyny without having to deny reality or accept the Social Darwinism that is a distortion of Darwinian thought and current evolutionary views, and is used to rationalism racism and male supremacy.
May I suggest the following book: "Whose Afraid of Charles Darwin?: Debating Feminism and Evolutionary Theory," by Griet Vandermassen, a feminist who became a biologist. She didn't discard feminism, but just integrated it with reality.
15
You erect a straw man argument. No one claimed that there were no psychological gender differences--just that we're not smart enough to distinguish between our own biases and these differences. Obviously Damore is a victim of his bias.
Evolutionary biology is no more a hard science than its predecessor, sociobiology. Society has shed many of the beliefs it used to hold as scientific fact: that childless women are unfulfilled, that men aren't suited to nurturing, that women are emotionally and morally the weaker sex, that women aren't suited to combat, etc. Damore's beliefs about women's innate inferiority in technology will one day join this trash bin of rejected prejudices.
As a supporter of science, I'm a skeptic about theories that make far-reaching conclusions about innate gender (or racial) differences.
Evolutionary biology is no more a hard science than its predecessor, sociobiology. Society has shed many of the beliefs it used to hold as scientific fact: that childless women are unfulfilled, that men aren't suited to nurturing, that women are emotionally and morally the weaker sex, that women aren't suited to combat, etc. Damore's beliefs about women's innate inferiority in technology will one day join this trash bin of rejected prejudices.
As a supporter of science, I'm a skeptic about theories that make far-reaching conclusions about innate gender (or racial) differences.
2
Many people choose AWAY from majors/fields that they would prefer because of stereotypes, fearing non-acceptance, being steered away. I've seen it happen, happened to my sister and maybe my mother (both were told how horribly women were treated in medical school). There may be some gender based predispositions in talent and preference for certain professions, but both can hugely be affected by societal factors.
3
I would be okay if the alt-right boycotted everything Silicon Valley amd their ilk represent - No more Facebook, searching Google, no more iWhatever purchases, no more Trump Xmas ornaments from Amazon...lets see how long they last. At worst, at least we won't be subjected to their hateful and ill-informed rants.
7
Damore had an employment-at-will relationship with Google. They could get rid of him, and they did.
Right-wing supporters are total hypocrites.
Right-wing supporters are total hypocrites.
13
The alt-right needs to follow their own advice and start up tech bohemoths in rural Mississippi or the backwoods of Alabama or the remote stretches of Appalacia. I mean, if they are so passionate about Damore's junk science, then they should recognize there's a reason why those tech companies sprout up and thrive in sharply liberal locations and with a generally liberal culture slant. What they are wanting is essentially "Affirmative Action" for their ethically inferior, scientifically debunked, and morally repugnant political views.
20
I like that - affirmative action for alt-right hate. Level the playing field!
"Garbage in; garbage out." If you are going to reason about something, draw conclusions on any topic, your conclusion is only going to be as good as your data and premises. Unless you are dealing with pure logic or mathematics, your premises need to be based on as much experiential data as possible.
That is why diversity is necessary. People have different experiences in life and varied input is necessary in order to draw the best general conclusions. Otherwise, you get some scarcely out of adolescence person such as Mr. Damore making uninformed jejeune policy decisions.
That is why diversity is necessary. People have different experiences in life and varied input is necessary in order to draw the best general conclusions. Otherwise, you get some scarcely out of adolescence person such as Mr. Damore making uninformed jejeune policy decisions.
7
All these tech titans were ridiculed and demoralized by women since junior high school - Consider Damore's memo a cathartic rant 'a la revenge of the nerds. First they rebuked their prom invitations- 20 years later the pretty cheerleaders are their victims of sexual discrimination. Why are back stories of the accused only reserved for poor minorities? Ladies and Gentlemen- I bring you liberalism at its' finest!
1
I've been dealing with these Nazis and Klansmen here in the Midwest for decades. They are dangerous, especially when they're drunk and stoned out of their mind, but they are also stupid and many of them are petty criminals.
The New York Times is not a leftist newspaper. The Daily Worker is a leftist newspaper. The NY Times always tries to tell the unbiased truth and is the gold standard for responsible ethical journalism. This paper walks the straight and narrow and I am proud of them and support the work they do with my paid subscription. They admit when they make a mistake and take effective corrective measures to prevent mistakes from reoccurring which is something the right wing media never does.
I'm dismayed at how far right the norm in this country has become. My advice is not to be cowed or become fearful of the alt right. It's time to call them out and support organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center which has long kept track of these creeps.
The New York Times is not a leftist newspaper. The Daily Worker is a leftist newspaper. The NY Times always tries to tell the unbiased truth and is the gold standard for responsible ethical journalism. This paper walks the straight and narrow and I am proud of them and support the work they do with my paid subscription. They admit when they make a mistake and take effective corrective measures to prevent mistakes from reoccurring which is something the right wing media never does.
I'm dismayed at how far right the norm in this country has become. My advice is not to be cowed or become fearful of the alt right. It's time to call them out and support organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center which has long kept track of these creeps.
42
Whatever keeps hateful garbage from circulating is fine by me.
4
Mr. Damore took his Ph.D in biology off his linkedin page today after a Harvard administrator said he left the program before graduating. Usually, a fabrication on a resume is grounds for immediate firing in most companies. The original reason given for firing him might seem to some like a leftist conspiracy but the lies on his resume are something he can't deny.
23
A linkedin page is not a resume; it was created after he joined google
They didn't need a reason anyway. He was at-will.
Good for them and good for us! They build their own platforms and work with their kind. We keep building our stuff and try to maintain an inclusive and encouraging corporation culture. I just prefer working with "nice" people. People who don't like the culture these companies currently promote can build their own companies. We don't need to deal with them and they don't need to deal with us! A true win-win.
5
This is not brain surgery. Silicon Valley is full of bright people and bright people are generally more progressive than reactionary. The alt-right, like the brown-shirts of the 1930's, are a dangerous and reactionary force in contemporary America and need to be resisted in all ways possible.
38
As a liberal it disheartens me to see so many people who show,d know better embracing corporate power over individuals because it is expedient.
7
It's because it's the law. If you don't agree with the law, elect a new Congress.
Hobby Lobby blocks an employee's access to birth control because a business has the right to do so. Google fires a mysogonist employee and the right starts complaining. Just the usual hypocrisy.
53
It's much worse than that.
Google NEVER asked its employees to adopt liberal positions on social issues in their private life, it only requires employees to not ignore scientific evidence on gender or race issues IF they want to influence the company's culture on those issues.
A private sector business has no right whatsoever to meddle with your private life as an employee , and cannot possibly restrict your freedom of expression outside the company.
It does have the right though to decide what work ethics it believes will create the most profits for the company, and to require all employees to agree with that corporate culture or if not, go try to find work somewhere else. THAT is called "capitalism" ... ! You don't get into people's private life, you just impose a specific work ethics at the work floor, period.
Google NEVER asked its employees to adopt liberal positions on social issues in their private life, it only requires employees to not ignore scientific evidence on gender or race issues IF they want to influence the company's culture on those issues.
A private sector business has no right whatsoever to meddle with your private life as an employee , and cannot possibly restrict your freedom of expression outside the company.
It does have the right though to decide what work ethics it believes will create the most profits for the company, and to require all employees to agree with that corporate culture or if not, go try to find work somewhere else. THAT is called "capitalism" ... ! You don't get into people's private life, you just impose a specific work ethics at the work floor, period.
9
Hobby Lobby "blocks an employee's access to birth control" the same way that I block your access to Japanese cars if I don't buy you a Lexus.
False. Hobby Lobby blkcs an employee's access to birth control in the same way that it blocks its employee's access to cars if it prohibits them from using their money to buy a car.
Health insurance is part of an employee's compensation. (Like a salary) Hobby Lobby isn't buying anyone birth control. (Like a car). You appear to be very confused about how insurance works. Perhaps you should do some background reading. Employees obtain birth control (car) at an affordable rate by using their insurance policy. (salary)
Now that I've spelled it out for you, are you clear?
Health insurance is part of an employee's compensation. (Like a salary) Hobby Lobby isn't buying anyone birth control. (Like a car). You appear to be very confused about how insurance works. Perhaps you should do some background reading. Employees obtain birth control (car) at an affordable rate by using their insurance policy. (salary)
Now that I've spelled it out for you, are you clear?
Congratulations on adopting the Soviet Union's innovation model! And good luck with a self-limiting labor pool!
4
Google and PayPal SHOULD be a target of scrutiny, but not because of what the alt-wrong snowflakes say.
Google+ is an evil social media service just like Facebook; Larry Page shouted down the sane Sergey Brin to vacuum up and sell private user info; PayPal's service and legal compliance is...legendary, for all the wrong reasons; and Peter Thiel is, well, Peter Thiel.
In a sane world, even the alt-wrong would get behind stopping such so-called "tech" marketer misethics. But as the great René Descartes may or may not have once said, covfefe ergo nope.
Google+ is an evil social media service just like Facebook; Larry Page shouted down the sane Sergey Brin to vacuum up and sell private user info; PayPal's service and legal compliance is...legendary, for all the wrong reasons; and Peter Thiel is, well, Peter Thiel.
In a sane world, even the alt-wrong would get behind stopping such so-called "tech" marketer misethics. But as the great René Descartes may or may not have once said, covfefe ergo nope.
4
Facts have a liberal bias. Whatcha gonna do?
21
Truth often does too. Go figure.
5
Fabricated bias - there are plenty of websites where if I persisted on making insulting remarks to conservatives or anyone else, my comments would be deleted and eventually I would be barred. Sure, the alt-right doesn't see it that way, doesn't see how saying that women are inferior might be considered offensive to women, and that illuminates their problem in general - cluelessness Ooh, I just insulted the alt-right - how is that different from calling women dumb? Well, being a woman (ignoring gender reassignment for the moment) is a state of being whereas being clueless is to some degree a choice (I could suggest there are societal factors that contribute to cluelessness, but the alt-right doesn't like that; wouldn't want to insult them). To illustrated, a woman can bone up on writing code, but she's still a woman with 'the taint' from the alt-right point of view, whereas, a clueless person can educate themselves and stop being clueless.
I find this curious - there must be some alt-right women who are techies who KNOW that the google memo is rubbish.
I find this curious - there must be some alt-right women who are techies who KNOW that the google memo is rubbish.
7
Enough with "alt-right". you can do better, NYT.
5
What would you call them? "Alt-right" is the term coined by Richard Spencer. Would you prefer to call them white nationalists?
1
Complaints about the dreaded "liberal bias" are valid only in regard to news reports. Corporations have no duty to be "balanced." Come to think of it, neither do the media. Let the lunatic fringe complain, laugh at them, then ignore them.
11
Now... Americans started to realize why censorship is necessary...
We all need liberals for freedom and creativity, but I find too that liberals tend to be dogmatic and myopic about some beliefs that drive me nuts: first, the idea that the racism of "Black Lives Matter!" is a good type of racism (no, it's not, there's no such thing as "good" racism), and second, the idea that if there is some disparity in almost any part of life between men and women that such disparity is the fault of some or all men (rather than, say, individuals making choices about their own lives).
When "liberals" figure those two things out, then they will stop feeding Trump's politics of hate.
When "liberals" figure those two things out, then they will stop feeding Trump's politics of hate.
6
It's hard to see the obvious when your a white male. If your a woman, or a man of color, you would see racism. I'm white my stepfather was black, I've been the recipient of bigotry, for those who never have you'll never know or understand. But the demographic is changing, and whites won't be a majority in 20 years, maybe then when your on the receiving end, you'll get it.
3
You are lumping all liberals together. That's not fair or true.
No one has ever claimed that there is a "good type" of racism. Black Lives Matter isn't a racist organization. Look at their mission statement.
Damore was publishing his own misogyny, not describing any innate differences between men and women.
Damore was publishing his own misogyny, not describing any innate differences between men and women.
5
Could we all please reconsider the use of the term "Alt-Right?" The group to which it applies includes, among others, white nationalists, Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and misogynists. Their self-evident aims are hate, violence and intolerance. The prefix "alt," or "alternative," on the other hand, refers to things that are novel, cutting edge, outsider-cool, popular. In the fact-based world, those groups are not those things. They are backward and retrograde. They are nostalgic for a time when white men were on top economically, socially and politically.
21
"(...) its policy was “not to allow our services to be used for activities that promote hate, violence or racial intolerance.”"
How can you simultaneously claim to love the Constitution, and oppose any private sector business that decides to adopt this kind of policy?
The name "alt-right" is clearly perfect, as it indicates how this political group wants to distinguish itself from other political groups by adopting an "alternative facts" perspective on the world, where the word "facts" no longer refers to proven scientific theories or events, and rather becomes a synonym for opinions that want to stick to ideas that have been proven to be totally false.
If anything, this illustrates how much conservatives seem to have lost faith in the power of their own conservative philosophy to convince voters to elect them, so all they have left now is trying to turn things that have been proven and where no "opinions" are possible anymore, into issues where no matter what opinion still remains perfectly respectable, and discarding them an act of political violence.
That will never be a winning strategy. The only way to save conservatism in this country is to go back to conservative philosophy, study it, try to understand its (very interesting) arguments, and adapt it time and again to new scientific results, as ANY political philosophy has to do if it wants to stay relevant, and as liberal philosophy is doing today in a totally unapologetic way.
Yes you can, conservatives!
How can you simultaneously claim to love the Constitution, and oppose any private sector business that decides to adopt this kind of policy?
The name "alt-right" is clearly perfect, as it indicates how this political group wants to distinguish itself from other political groups by adopting an "alternative facts" perspective on the world, where the word "facts" no longer refers to proven scientific theories or events, and rather becomes a synonym for opinions that want to stick to ideas that have been proven to be totally false.
If anything, this illustrates how much conservatives seem to have lost faith in the power of their own conservative philosophy to convince voters to elect them, so all they have left now is trying to turn things that have been proven and where no "opinions" are possible anymore, into issues where no matter what opinion still remains perfectly respectable, and discarding them an act of political violence.
That will never be a winning strategy. The only way to save conservatism in this country is to go back to conservative philosophy, study it, try to understand its (very interesting) arguments, and adapt it time and again to new scientific results, as ANY political philosophy has to do if it wants to stay relevant, and as liberal philosophy is doing today in a totally unapologetic way.
Yes you can, conservatives!
2
Silicon Valley is libertarian not liberal. It may slate towards the democratic party, but that's chiefly due to republican's anti science stance its taken.
42
This Google incident had the smell of yet another choreographed stunt by the so-called alt-right. I urge the NY Times to look into Wall Street firms and fossil fuel companies and report on how much "free speech" can be found there! How many traders are able to say they think the firm should pay higher taxes or share more with the bottom 50%? How many petro engineers are able to say that fracking causes earthquakes. Not many, I wager. So what is the point then?
156
Very interesting point indeed.
6
That is because employees do not enjoy the 1st Amendment in the workplace. Its always been true. That of course does not mean that places of employment don't ask for their employees' opinions, good ones definitely do. But sending out a memo saying women are not biologically fit to be coders or software engineers was so over the top that a memo in any company that made a similar statement would have been summarily fired. I know, I'm a former HR Manager.
Conservativism is a professed ideology: small government, deregulation. Liberals share causes, but it's not like we're desperate for huge, intrusive government and regulations for their own sake.
In other words, "liberalism" is neither an -ism nor a bias!
In other words, "liberalism" is neither an -ism nor a bias!
6
This is the sort of a smear tactic that diminishes NYT and gives alt-right fodder for their claims. It's also a piece of red meat propaganda from NYT to it's progressive alt-left base.
I am not "alt-right". I am vociferously against Trump and have been so all along. Yes I find Google's actions against diversity of opinion despicable. On the same level as Trump's base echo chamber. Diversity dogma which as spread in the valley is every bit as damaging as Trump's policies. Motivations for both are rooted in a very similar intolerance of dissent and cult-like conviction of moral superiority.
They are both rooted in ignorance and anti-scientific bent of the extremists on both sides of the political spectrum.
I am not "alt-right". I am vociferously against Trump and have been so all along. Yes I find Google's actions against diversity of opinion despicable. On the same level as Trump's base echo chamber. Diversity dogma which as spread in the valley is every bit as damaging as Trump's policies. Motivations for both are rooted in a very similar intolerance of dissent and cult-like conviction of moral superiority.
They are both rooted in ignorance and anti-scientific bent of the extremists on both sides of the political spectrum.
12
I understand and appreciate Google's position. Suppose Google allowed this sort of "free speech" and more and more people in the company decided to express their opinions about their perceived inferiority of women, or other races, or LGBT. Pretty soon Google would not be a for which company anyone except bigots would want to work.
That may be great news for white conservative bastions like Breitbart or self-important twerps like Milo Egopoloulos and she who shall remain nameless but is also a publicity seeker who knows no bounds or shame, but I would like to see what they'd do if someone in their own social or business circle had an opinion that contrasted with theirs.
This seems like a set-up. The guy probably didn't want to work at Google anymore and decided the best way to get a financial send-off was to sue the company and hope they settle just to get the guy off their back. This tactic hs been used several times in other companies.
That may be great news for white conservative bastions like Breitbart or self-important twerps like Milo Egopoloulos and she who shall remain nameless but is also a publicity seeker who knows no bounds or shame, but I would like to see what they'd do if someone in their own social or business circle had an opinion that contrasted with theirs.
This seems like a set-up. The guy probably didn't want to work at Google anymore and decided the best way to get a financial send-off was to sue the company and hope they settle just to get the guy off their back. This tactic hs been used several times in other companies.
4
Tolerating diverse opinions doesn't mean you have to tolerate misogyny, racism, xenophobia, or other forms of hate. While the first amendment protects this speech in the public square, no private corporation is obligated to respect them.
Hate isn't the same thing as dissent.
Hate isn't the same thing as dissent.
1
Did you read the document? would it qualify as "hate" or "mysoginy" ? No rational person would come to this conclusion. Only an ideologue would.
Apparently the "Alt-right" doesn't like private enterprise. They can choose their own set of values, but we don't have to agree.
20
Liberal bias = well-educated, curious, thoughtful, critical thinkers, pro-science, arts, humanities; pro-people.
Right wing = fear of intellectuals, fear of science, art, humanities; fear of anything anti-capitalist; fear of women; fear of foreigners, fear of ideas, liars, propagandist
hmm...so yes, anything worth living for has a liberal bias.
Right wing = fear of intellectuals, fear of science, art, humanities; fear of anything anti-capitalist; fear of women; fear of foreigners, fear of ideas, liars, propagandist
hmm...so yes, anything worth living for has a liberal bias.
137
You're right, but there's nothing inherently "conservative" in this, it's rather what "neoconservatism" stands for.
One of its founding fathers, Irving Kristol, wrote in 1976 in an op-ed for the WSJ that the conservative party is necessarily the "stupid party", as it appeals to "sentiment" rather than arguments. That's why, he wrote, a "healthy society" keeps its intellectuals far away from public political debate, because as soon as they enter into the spotlight, conservatives who are always the less articulate party cannot but lose the debate.
Before that, for centuries conservative philosophers developed highly interesting and solid philosophies defending conservatism (David Hume, for instance).
So the reason why today only liberals and independents are interested in science and fact-checking, is not because there's something inherently political and "liberal" about science and fact-checking, contrary to what the alt-right hopes we'll believe, but simply because today America's conservatives lost the confidence in their own philosophy and as a consequence now HAVE to deny proven facts and systematically spread lies in order to be elected and have access to power in DC ...
Sad ... for the country, AND for conservatism ... !
One of its founding fathers, Irving Kristol, wrote in 1976 in an op-ed for the WSJ that the conservative party is necessarily the "stupid party", as it appeals to "sentiment" rather than arguments. That's why, he wrote, a "healthy society" keeps its intellectuals far away from public political debate, because as soon as they enter into the spotlight, conservatives who are always the less articulate party cannot but lose the debate.
Before that, for centuries conservative philosophers developed highly interesting and solid philosophies defending conservatism (David Hume, for instance).
So the reason why today only liberals and independents are interested in science and fact-checking, is not because there's something inherently political and "liberal" about science and fact-checking, contrary to what the alt-right hopes we'll believe, but simply because today America's conservatives lost the confidence in their own philosophy and as a consequence now HAVE to deny proven facts and systematically spread lies in order to be elected and have access to power in DC ...
Sad ... for the country, AND for conservatism ... !
5
Just another Steve Bannon action to build the wall even higher between Americans. Steve Bannon, from his position in the Oval Office, is directing and manipulating the alt-right world of Breitbart and their internet subculture. Just keeping the base happy. Like Trump, they need an identified enemy to bully and intimidate. It makes them feel powerful.
Trump has totally failed as a leader. He has NO inclination to speak to or work for ALL Americans. Steve Bannon is his facilitator. He helps to stir the controversy, stoke the fire and keep hate and intolerance alive. A vile man.
The only wall Trump is succeeding in building is the one between 'liberals' and the 'alt-right'. Truly a tiny, tiny man.
Trump has totally failed as a leader. He has NO inclination to speak to or work for ALL Americans. Steve Bannon is his facilitator. He helps to stir the controversy, stoke the fire and keep hate and intolerance alive. A vile man.
The only wall Trump is succeeding in building is the one between 'liberals' and the 'alt-right'. Truly a tiny, tiny man.
29
Censoring extreme right-wing views should be the obligation of every American.
38
Google is practicing it's at-will employment rules, which conservatives have championed for decades. It states that the employer can fire anyone, for any reason, at any time, the only exception being in cases of illegal discrimination.
This latest incident and complaint against Google shows that the alt-right isn't conservative anything, it's just a whiny special-rights-for-whites group. Which is fine, but they need to stop pretending like somehow they are above special interest politics. On the contrary, they are in favor of protecting special interests, as long as the interests are theirs.
This latest incident and complaint against Google shows that the alt-right isn't conservative anything, it's just a whiny special-rights-for-whites group. Which is fine, but they need to stop pretending like somehow they are above special interest politics. On the contrary, they are in favor of protecting special interests, as long as the interests are theirs.
227
Sounds like "Right to Work" laws have come back to bite the far right. If they want neutral they need to remember that this is what they wanted.
“We’re just doing what the left has done for a while,” Mr. Cernovich told me. “You use activist tactics to apply pressure to corporations, and the corporations respond.”
Key difference, though, is that much of the alt-right activity is considered reprehensible and hate-filled, even by many conservatives - rather than there being any moral shame (being seen as racist, sexist etc.) in being called out for barring alt-right views/activities, there is moral pride.
Key difference, though, is that much of the alt-right activity is considered reprehensible and hate-filled, even by many conservatives - rather than there being any moral shame (being seen as racist, sexist etc.) in being called out for barring alt-right views/activities, there is moral pride.
20
To quote John McCain, stop listening bombastic loudmouths.
3
Is this objection to Google et al adopting a certain political outlook a lot different from Hobby Lobby (and others) promoting a relgious culture at work?
11
It is good for radical righties to start their own venues. By coming out of the shadows, it shows they believe in their own rhetoric. And it gives them something to do besides attacking normal discussions on other venues with their hate mongering propaganda.
2
I maybe mistaken but aren't most if not all "right to work for less" states "conservative" states? In RTWFL AZ, the man could have been fired because if your boss doesn't like your attitude, you are gone. You have no rights when follow a different direction than the management.
11
Silicon Valley has many conservatives in power. For example, Meg Whitman of HP, John Chambers of Cisco, Larry Ellison of Oracle all donate either entirely or mostly to Republicans. Meg Whitman also stood for Governor and Carly Fiorina (former CEO of HP) stood for Senator and President as GOP candidates. Many of the policies mentioned here are followed by their companies so there is a wider consensus than just a liberal consensus e.g. Oracle on its website says it celebrates pride week. The alt-right is off the charts (way to the right off what people consider conservative). Should a company's policies be dictated by pandering to such extreme groups (such as neo-Nazis).
18
So now conservatism and white supremacy are one and the same? I remember when neo-Nazis weren't considered just another right wing political group. It's as if these skinheads want you to believe they were hanging out with George Bush or my dad down at his defense industry engineering job back in the day. If I'm wrong about this and they really are what conservatism has begun, wow, the Republicans are in trouble.
10
Their threat is to go and make their own alt-right sites?
That's cool. The primary threat of this group has always been that they manage to get their "news" posted in locations that generally have actual news. Which gives the alt-right "news" more credibility than it would have had otherwise.
It does make me sad to see them creating more hate speech echo chambers. But that seems preferential giving them appearance of creating credible news.
That's cool. The primary threat of this group has always been that they manage to get their "news" posted in locations that generally have actual news. Which gives the alt-right "news" more credibility than it would have had otherwise.
It does make me sad to see them creating more hate speech echo chambers. But that seems preferential giving them appearance of creating credible news.
5
The trouble with the alt-right is that it is a destructive, churlish group of miscreants. We can allow it space in social media, but it represents totally irrational thought that erodes our democracy with its the support of a notoriously dysfunctional philosophy.
But the alt-right has elected its president. It's a golden time for the alt-right. They'll mever come anywhere closer to power than what they have now. Social media enables this group.
Democracies can fail. They depend on an educated public. Maybe the Chinese have the next ascendent form of government, that which can control its destructive elements.
But the alt-right has elected its president. It's a golden time for the alt-right. They'll mever come anywhere closer to power than what they have now. Social media enables this group.
Democracies can fail. They depend on an educated public. Maybe the Chinese have the next ascendent form of government, that which can control its destructive elements.
6
First, let's try to remember how much racists, sexists, white supremacists, and neo-Nazis have contributed to society and the national economy, compared to the majority of the people who work in Silicon Valley.
. . . (crickets)
Second, there is no "alt right." But racists, sexists, white supremacists, neo-Nazis and other varieties of ignorant people do exist, unfortunately. And they are a whiny bunch.
. . . (crickets)
Second, there is no "alt right." But racists, sexists, white supremacists, neo-Nazis and other varieties of ignorant people do exist, unfortunately. And they are a whiny bunch.
13
Definitely Damore has some issues , and the biological differences he was so aggrieved about maybe has more to do with dating matters , sounds to me more like sour grapes , will fit in nicely with those other trolls .
4
Yesterday I listened to a man (sorry, didn't catch his name) who has been researching the alt-right/trump explosive use of the internet as a political tool. He said there are a handful of "faces" in the media, backed up by a bunch of white non-college educated white boys, in mom&dad's basement, filling in time by raging and ranting until dinner is served.
Nevertheless, be on guard: they are a dangerous bunch of fascists even if they don't know it. "Conservative" they are not.
Nevertheless, be on guard: they are a dangerous bunch of fascists even if they don't know it. "Conservative" they are not.
8
Unfortunately the "conservatives" have embraced them in a desperate grasp at power.
7
Anything bigger than a sole proprietorship requires a great deal of cooperation among humans for the entity to function. I would be surprised if all companies weren't generally closer to the liberal end of the political scale. Add in the need for successful businesses to heed scientific laws and motivate people by lifting them up, rather than bullying them, as well as always being on the lookout for the new and novel, and it's a wonder there are any conservative firms at all.
1
I'm not sure if the "alt-right" understands the concept of cause and effect. Sure, in this amazing country of ours folks are encouraged to speak their minds. But what sometimes happens when someone doesn't know when it's time to stop speaking their mind is they get fired. It's quite simple really.
2
The alt-right is all wrong. all the time.
16
Cody Wilson is the man who became infamous for designing and sharing files for 3D-printed guns that can't be detected by metal detectors. He's a very bad person and his intentions are not good.
5
Everybody understands why Silicon Valley slants so strongly at the current moment to the Democrats. At the end of the day, it is all about money & the tech founders and venture capitalists profit immensely from the vast abuses of our immigration laws. Especially legal immigration abuses in the H1-B visa category. And perhaps illegal immigration abuses as well (for example, so some don't have to mow their own lawns or raise their own children)? The current iteration of the GOP believes in enforcing our bipartisan-enacted immigration laws and thus are we really surprised that Trump has alienated Silicon Valley?
5
The tech industry is a major producer of economic inequality. Its pro-immigration and internationalist stances result not from its compassion and sense of justice but for its inherent need for a free flow of labor and capital. Its culturally level (for lots of good capitalist reason) but it is not at all economically left. Quite the opposite.
6
What makes you think Republicans don't support H1-B visa abuses? Trump's proposal on immigration reform is to expand H1-B visas, and he abuses those visas all the time in his private businesses.
Democrats have only supported expanding H1-B visas as part of a broad immigration reform package. Without broad immigration reform, they've threatened to filibuster the H1-B visa expansion.
Democrats have only supported expanding H1-B visas as part of a broad immigration reform package. Without broad immigration reform, they've threatened to filibuster the H1-B visa expansion.
2
Ooooooh... the nazis are going to "expose" the liberal bias. Not necessary, it's well known and already exposed. And... so what. It's, what, illegal to be liberal and be a techie or shareholder or tech business owner?
Here's an idea: you nazis can go start a silicon valley of your own, heck go start your own country. It can be all white, all male and Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III can be your dear leader.
Here's an idea: you nazis can go start a silicon valley of your own, heck go start your own country. It can be all white, all male and Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III can be your dear leader.
232
No place will have them.
1
The self-fetishizing Right demands rights and privileges they exist to deny to others.
You call these people advocates, but they are not.
One doesn't prevent the rescue of people at sea to make a point; advocate sexual abuse of children; discriminate against minorities, advocate violence against them, spend millions generating inflammatory stories and rousing crowds to act against them, and get to call oneself an advocate.
You betray your mission, New York Times.
Like creationist Evangelicals, these horrible people learn to speak the language of their enemy and turn it against them.
They say the words of political dialog, of patriotism, of humans looking for a place in the community. All the while they want to destroy political institutions; their perverse patriotism has nothing to do with the nation, its all about some golden past when an earlier generation of hateful bigots managed some short-lived influence.
This is our version of WWII Germany's fascination with ridiculous Teutonic mythology. Its Day-Glo plastic flags and cowardly tough guys whining about the size of their weapons.
Like those on the Right who make a fund-raising fortune from the bars and trailer parks where they convince people that academia is a den of reds, these cretins run around claiming Silicon Valley is a liberal fortress.
In each case conservatism, even of this dastardly kind, is well represented.
That's where the true danger lies. There, and in the White House.
You call these people advocates, but they are not.
One doesn't prevent the rescue of people at sea to make a point; advocate sexual abuse of children; discriminate against minorities, advocate violence against them, spend millions generating inflammatory stories and rousing crowds to act against them, and get to call oneself an advocate.
You betray your mission, New York Times.
Like creationist Evangelicals, these horrible people learn to speak the language of their enemy and turn it against them.
They say the words of political dialog, of patriotism, of humans looking for a place in the community. All the while they want to destroy political institutions; their perverse patriotism has nothing to do with the nation, its all about some golden past when an earlier generation of hateful bigots managed some short-lived influence.
This is our version of WWII Germany's fascination with ridiculous Teutonic mythology. Its Day-Glo plastic flags and cowardly tough guys whining about the size of their weapons.
Like those on the Right who make a fund-raising fortune from the bars and trailer parks where they convince people that academia is a den of reds, these cretins run around claiming Silicon Valley is a liberal fortress.
In each case conservatism, even of this dastardly kind, is well represented.
That's where the true danger lies. There, and in the White House.
15
I don't feel harmed yet by The New York Times, although I can see why others might.
After all, it's a cosmopolitan, leftist paper that despises President Trump (whom I admire) and promotes story lines that do harm to the conservative values and politicians I believe in.
But I'm sure the folks at the companies you cite would never even think about stifling this paper's right to free expression -- even as it is deeply offensive to millions of people around the world, and -- in their eyes -- acts against the interests of the United States.
As long as political views are expressed peacefully by groups who have disavowed violence, there is no room for censorship.
On either side of the political spectrum.
After all, it's a cosmopolitan, leftist paper that despises President Trump (whom I admire) and promotes story lines that do harm to the conservative values and politicians I believe in.
But I'm sure the folks at the companies you cite would never even think about stifling this paper's right to free expression -- even as it is deeply offensive to millions of people around the world, and -- in their eyes -- acts against the interests of the United States.
As long as political views are expressed peacefully by groups who have disavowed violence, there is no room for censorship.
On either side of the political spectrum.
12
Define 'conservative values.' I'm just curious.
19
I'm curious in a different way - show me an article in the NYTimes that you find offensive and does what you say in your post. Thank you.
7
...... he has the right to free expression. No one did anything to that right. He does NOT have a right to work at google. The First Amendment doesn't apply to google. Google can fire anyone it wants for any reason- except a discriminatory reason.
BTW- "women are biologically inferior" is not a political view... it's sexism. Unless of course you want to go ahead and admit that sexism is a Republican party position. (We all know it is.)
I see why you admire trump- you both feel compelled to make authoritative pronouncements about topics you're ignorant of.
BTW- "women are biologically inferior" is not a political view... it's sexism. Unless of course you want to go ahead and admit that sexism is a Republican party position. (We all know it is.)
I see why you admire trump- you both feel compelled to make authoritative pronouncements about topics you're ignorant of.
Golly. So the gang that hate Science - at every opportunity- are surprised when a community built/based 100% on Top Science - is "biased" against them?
See, Alt-Idiots; it's not your politics they despise - it's your stupid. I think this is an argument you will surely lose - and it will make you look even dumber.
See, Alt-Idiots; it's not your politics they despise - it's your stupid. I think this is an argument you will surely lose - and it will make you look even dumber.
79
Activists, from whatever side they claim to represent, are definitely an obnoxious bunch.
What's bizarre to me is that the far-right would think that Silicon Valley is liberal. The same Silicon Valley that is hard at work attempting to destroy the unions and the last working-class occupations that exist in America? Silicon Valley is fashionably liberal on meaningless social issues, but on just about everything else they are in lock-step with the far-right. Both have a Darwinian view of not simply how the world works, but, rather, how it should work. Nothing could be more right-wing than that.
Ironic that the far-right would chose to attack Silicon Valley, but, then again, these people are morons.
What's bizarre to me is that the far-right would think that Silicon Valley is liberal. The same Silicon Valley that is hard at work attempting to destroy the unions and the last working-class occupations that exist in America? Silicon Valley is fashionably liberal on meaningless social issues, but on just about everything else they are in lock-step with the far-right. Both have a Darwinian view of not simply how the world works, but, rather, how it should work. Nothing could be more right-wing than that.
Ironic that the far-right would chose to attack Silicon Valley, but, then again, these people are morons.
7
Wait, I think I'm beginning to understand the formula:
1950s Hollywood blacklists = Bad
2017 Silicon Valley blacklists = Good
1960s banning Black Panthers from speaking at colleges = Bad
2017 banning right-wing commentators from colleges = Good
1950s limits on speech at colleges = Bad
2017 campus speech codes = Good
1950s/1960s widespread threats of violence against civil rights leaders = Bad
2017 widespread images/threats of violence against elected Republican president = Good
I guess I had been using the wrong formula all along, which was the following:
All blacklists, banning, censorship, and threats of violence = Bad
Ability to speak freely = Good
1950s Hollywood blacklists = Bad
2017 Silicon Valley blacklists = Good
1960s banning Black Panthers from speaking at colleges = Bad
2017 banning right-wing commentators from colleges = Good
1950s limits on speech at colleges = Bad
2017 campus speech codes = Good
1950s/1960s widespread threats of violence against civil rights leaders = Bad
2017 widespread images/threats of violence against elected Republican president = Good
I guess I had been using the wrong formula all along, which was the following:
All blacklists, banning, censorship, and threats of violence = Bad
Ability to speak freely = Good
12
Wonderful and logical comparison! Thank you.
The more the lunatic "Alt-right" screeches "liberal bias," the more "liberal bias" just starts to look like the truth.
14
"Starts to?"
Most of the time, what these people refer to as "liberal bias" isn't even liberal. It's simply the opposite of what they believe.
Most of the time, what these people refer to as "liberal bias" isn't even liberal. It's simply the opposite of what they believe.
4
Liberal bias = facts and data, which the alt-right calls "fake news" or simply refuses to believe. Silicon Valley pretty much runs on facts and data, so of course, the alt-right calls it "liberal bias."
6
I don't pay attention to the alt-right, it's pretty racist stuff from what I've seen.
What next, phrenology? Skull-measurements as part of job interviews?
What next, phrenology? Skull-measurements as part of job interviews?
7
Lunatic far right extremist organizations like the Taliban and ISIS also view anyone who doesn't agree with their ideology as liberal leftists.
So now we have our own home grown version with the alt-right.
So now we have our own home grown version with the alt-right.
10
haha 'ideas'
1
This might work out well, I hope the mighty engines of Silicon Valley crush the alt-right. What they don't understand is that reality has a liberal bias. They also fail to grasp that their racist, misogynistic, ignorant, fascist ideology has no place in humanity's future.
The alt-right is the nicer name for neo-nazis, who are basically Nazis without the Wehrmacht. And there is no reason to be nice to them, no reason to tolerate them, and every reason to suppress them. I hope the suppression keeps up until that wonderful day comes when they are entirely eliminated.
The alt-right is the nicer name for neo-nazis, who are basically Nazis without the Wehrmacht. And there is no reason to be nice to them, no reason to tolerate them, and every reason to suppress them. I hope the suppression keeps up until that wonderful day comes when they are entirely eliminated.
40
Why is the Times giving these nut cases the publicity they crave?
4
It is disgusting that Silicon Valley might not want our nations finest Nazis into their technology. We've got to weaponized the Trump "base" (whatever that is) and the Alt-Right as quickly as possible to restore the Fourth Reich here in Amerika.
Excuse me, I'm sick to my stomach again.
Excuse me, I'm sick to my stomach again.
5
The alt-right, aka maladjusted SJW's. Their histrionics would be comedic if they weren't enabled by man-babies in powerful places.
If anything, the existence of this ideology proves out how poor the Boomers are at parenting.
Alt-Right basement dwellers: Grow up, man up and contribute something to society. Your daughters will thank you.
If anything, the existence of this ideology proves out how poor the Boomers are at parenting.
Alt-Right basement dwellers: Grow up, man up and contribute something to society. Your daughters will thank you.
1
I'm truly sick and tired of a small subgroup of idiots that call themselves the 'Alt-Right'.
13
I take issue with the Times' use of the term "Alt-Right". The term was created by people who wanted to make racism, sexism, etc, acceptable. The correct term for anyone identifying as Alt-Right is "Racist"
13
Employees of US companies are constantly surprised that they can be fired for any or no reason, barring elements like racial bias. Perhaps they think they are living in France which, allegedly, suffers terrible economic difficulties from not being able to fire people at will. I thought that there were still components of the right in this country that supported free market capitalism, where hiring and firing at will is one of the selling points. Is there now a movement on the right for collective bargaining agreements that lay out procedures for firing? Perhaps they want to be like members of the UAW or teachers unions. Or perhaps like a liberal college professor with tenure, which I was before I retired. Interesting.
5
I work in tech in SF, and everyone I know is thrilled that this jerk was fired.
Discrimination is treating groups that are equal as if they are not. For example, assuming women are worse at math is discriminatory because it treats the two groups as if they are not similar when in fact they are. On the other hand, this guy is actually a misguided jerk, as proven by his personal behavior. Firing him is not discriminatory. Political viewpoint is not a protected class.
Discrimination is treating groups that are equal as if they are not. For example, assuming women are worse at math is discriminatory because it treats the two groups as if they are not similar when in fact they are. On the other hand, this guy is actually a misguided jerk, as proven by his personal behavior. Firing him is not discriminatory. Political viewpoint is not a protected class.
22
Good, let the alt-right form their own safe spaces, an idea they love to ridicule. But seriously I would love to never have to interact with people who don't know why we can't be tolerant of racism and misogyny, and who sincerely accuse those critical of white supremacy of "intolerance".
9
Companies like Google and Facebook have every right to censor right-wing views without so much as an explanation. Up until now, in an effort to maintain maximum customers and income, they have played along by giving very reasonable explanations when the limits were hit. They also set rather minimal limits if Milo Yiannopoulos still has an account.
But if their hand is forced, Google, et al., will cut loose the right-wing. The free market favors majorities over minorities in search of profits. In today's world, the alt-right is the minority. Their very vocal protests rely on these same companies they are railing against to reach an audible volume!
But if their hand is forced, Google, et al., will cut loose the right-wing. The free market favors majorities over minorities in search of profits. In today's world, the alt-right is the minority. Their very vocal protests rely on these same companies they are railing against to reach an audible volume!
3
Two questions- one for each side:
1. for the Google guy, Ever Google Grace Hopper?
2. where are the alt right women who should be offended by the Google guy?
1. for the Google guy, Ever Google Grace Hopper?
2. where are the alt right women who should be offended by the Google guy?
1
Alt-right women are cowed into submission, discouraged from education or career, and are told to look to home and motherhood as their highest achievement. Which reinforces the Alt-Right perspective that women do not have the mental or physical capacity to rise. That is the premise of Damore's position, which I'm sure offended many of the women employees at Google, as well as in most other companies in the Bay Area.
2
I worked up there in the toddler years (if you will) of the industry. I remember when Apple World Headquarters was unveiled in the early eighties. A bunch of computer dignitaries were there; like Wozniak, Nolan Bushnell, Bill Gates; very few at the event even knew who they were. The Silicon Valley at that time seemed very apolitical. It seemed a bunch of guys (yep) who liked to design electronics and didn't care about politics. I worked on just a couple of videos; one for a small company; and one for an inventor type. In neither instance do I remember anyone talking politics or a particularly right or left point of view. For right wingers to think; "That industry is LIBERAL!!" is just par for the course. Just like they all think Hollywood is liberal. Take a close look, and it's all talk show host baloney, not rooted in reality.
7
For a long time the Right has defended the rights of corporations, you know, "they are people too," to fire, silence, and oppress voices for equality, for women's justice, for anti-poverty campaigns, for progressive forces, even for education and birth control. So now they turn around and pursue Google? Balderdash!
Let the alt-right fight for the rights of Church employees to advocate for pro-choice stances while on the job. Let the alt-right insist to have child-care workers exculpate paedophilia while attending to the nursery like Mr. Yiannopoulos did. Let the alt-right fight for workers to speak up and unionize at the factory floor.
Then, and only then, can the hypocritical alt-right make righteous noises about Mr. Damore.
Let the alt-right fight for the rights of Church employees to advocate for pro-choice stances while on the job. Let the alt-right insist to have child-care workers exculpate paedophilia while attending to the nursery like Mr. Yiannopoulos did. Let the alt-right fight for workers to speak up and unionize at the factory floor.
Then, and only then, can the hypocritical alt-right make righteous noises about Mr. Damore.
5
I like the comment by Rockets of Austin. I am generalizing here but when most people go to college (or otherwise gain education and worldly experience) they meet people from difference places, backgrounds, religions, and/or when they go to silicon Valley or the "big city" and meet a wide range of people, they become more "liberal." I think of myself as a liberal in the school of Burke, Macaulay, and Gladstone in Victorian England. I have a right to my wacky thoughts and actions as long as they don't impinge on the rights of others or harm other people. Other people have the same rights to thought and action as long it does not harm me or others.
But look at the map. The places that are prosperous and generating new technologies and new ideas are the places that are considered "liberal" or progressive. There are no new ideas in the heavily republican states. They spend all of their time thinking of ways to restrict abortion and trying to keep people with dark skins from voting. As people here say "Montgomery, Alabama is the place where good ideas go to die."
If it is a contest between Silicon Valley and Trumpland/altright, it should be no contest. Let the ideas and opinions flow and I will bet on the smart, industrious people who welcome good ideas regardless of who or where they come from.
But look at the map. The places that are prosperous and generating new technologies and new ideas are the places that are considered "liberal" or progressive. There are no new ideas in the heavily republican states. They spend all of their time thinking of ways to restrict abortion and trying to keep people with dark skins from voting. As people here say "Montgomery, Alabama is the place where good ideas go to die."
If it is a contest between Silicon Valley and Trumpland/altright, it should be no contest. Let the ideas and opinions flow and I will bet on the smart, industrious people who welcome good ideas regardless of who or where they come from.
11
One can tell from my profile name where I live and work. I have seen and heard this kind of talk and attitude before. Not often, but mostly in the past. To see this published today clearly rings of the influence of hate fostered by Trump and Bannon who hate with a passion the inventiveness and freedom of thought prevalent here. They don't and can't understand it in positive ways, so they twist technology and use it in harmful ways. This poor guy doesn't know what hit him. He'll soon find out when he goes job hunting. I suggest he move to Orange County with all of the other Birchers.
165
Unfortunately Damore will have plenty of offers from Fox, Koch Brothers, Hobby Lobby and other companies that tolerate alt-right bias and bigotry in their work environment. They won't care that he falsified his resume with a phony PhD reference. They'll even pay his lawyer fees while he sues Google. He'll be used as a Fox/ Breitbart pawn until all the PR opportunities are drained from this wet rag, and by then he'll have a tidy sum of money from speaker's fees at Alt-Right and white supremacy rallies.
2
Didn't they move to Arizona?
Let's cut to the core of the matter. It's idiotic to say that the Alt-right has found a new Enemy. We all know that. This is part of a national conversation we are having about merit vs diversity (affirmative action). What does Silicon Valley value more: diversity or merit? You can either hire for “diversity,” or you can hire for merit, but to the horror of SJW everywhere — you cannot have both.
Although the SCOTUS has never held that all workplaces must be racially or gender balanced, the EEOC has firmly embraced the presumption that the profiles of particular workplaces should reflect the composition of the broader population. The memo and firing have obliterated that idea and brought this hypocrisy into the cold light of day. Thus the liberal hand wringing.
This presumption makes no sense unless people from all groups are equally qualified for positions at all levels only then will every group be represented in each occupation exactly in proportion to its share of the broader population. If members of one group are more qualified for particular positions than others, they will be hired in disproportionately greater numbers; persons from a less qualified group will be under-represented in those jobs.The problem for diversity and equality advocates is that critics of quotas have framed the debate in a way that sets up an irreconcilable tension between the principle of merit & the goal of diversity. It won't work. That's an inconvenient truth that even Google can't solve.
Although the SCOTUS has never held that all workplaces must be racially or gender balanced, the EEOC has firmly embraced the presumption that the profiles of particular workplaces should reflect the composition of the broader population. The memo and firing have obliterated that idea and brought this hypocrisy into the cold light of day. Thus the liberal hand wringing.
This presumption makes no sense unless people from all groups are equally qualified for positions at all levels only then will every group be represented in each occupation exactly in proportion to its share of the broader population. If members of one group are more qualified for particular positions than others, they will be hired in disproportionately greater numbers; persons from a less qualified group will be under-represented in those jobs.The problem for diversity and equality advocates is that critics of quotas have framed the debate in a way that sets up an irreconcilable tension between the principle of merit & the goal of diversity. It won't work. That's an inconvenient truth that even Google can't solve.
2
I was going to suggest that this was just the right wing's need to find something to hate on in their never ending quest for enemies and victimization.....after all, the groups that weaponized "Merry Christmas", tried to boycott Hawaii, and see an existential threat arising from bathroom signs exist for little else.
But the article brings up a good point: without leeching off the platforms created by private business for a technology created by the government, these alt righties would have no bigger audience than the families that invited them to Thanksgiving again on the hopes they won't talk "politics". They need Google and PayPal and YouTube and, incredibly, think that they can discourage those companies from denying them service by boycotting them, that is, basically volunteering to avoid businesses that don't want to be associated with them in the first place. Ponder THAT.
But the article brings up a good point: without leeching off the platforms created by private business for a technology created by the government, these alt righties would have no bigger audience than the families that invited them to Thanksgiving again on the hopes they won't talk "politics". They need Google and PayPal and YouTube and, incredibly, think that they can discourage those companies from denying them service by boycotting them, that is, basically volunteering to avoid businesses that don't want to be associated with them in the first place. Ponder THAT.
8
Gee, I remember when I got banned from a few right wing sites because they didn't like the stuff I was writing. Believe me, given what I've seen, the right wing will be the first to censor if given the control to do so.
15
Would people be rushing to defend this guy if he said the reason there aren't more African Americans in executive positions is because they are biologically more prone to violence? I suspect expressing such a vile racist stereotype in the workplace would not be broadly defended as a "free speech". But a sexist stereotype of women being more "anxious" and "neurotic"? People rush to his defense!
For the record, he should not have been fired had he expressed a politically unpopular sentiment like, "Diversity doesn't matter in the workplace - all the matters is getting the highest quality candidates". Or "Programs aimed at helping women succeed disadvantage talented men who could use a leg up too." However saying women are biologically unsuited to engineering or high pressure jobs creates a hostile environment for any woman unfortunate enough to work for or with him.
For the record, he should not have been fired had he expressed a politically unpopular sentiment like, "Diversity doesn't matter in the workplace - all the matters is getting the highest quality candidates". Or "Programs aimed at helping women succeed disadvantage talented men who could use a leg up too." However saying women are biologically unsuited to engineering or high pressure jobs creates a hostile environment for any woman unfortunate enough to work for or with him.
298
"saying women are biologically unsuited to engineering or high pressure jobs"
At least read the memo. He said nothing of the sort. In fact, he said that even though there were group trait differences at the population level, these were insignificant the level of individuals and in fact even at the population level there was more overlap than difference. Honestly, read the memo. 90% of the people commenting here clearly have not.
At least read the memo. He said nothing of the sort. In fact, he said that even though there were group trait differences at the population level, these were insignificant the level of individuals and in fact even at the population level there was more overlap than difference. Honestly, read the memo. 90% of the people commenting here clearly have not.
7
We got the memo. We read it. We still feel the hostility. You're playing word games. You keep emphasizing how he said there were group trait differences at the population level. What you fail to realize is that citing this as evidence of natural ability or inclination is a fallacy of causation. Does the population exhibit such differences due to nature or due to nurture? He says nature. We say nurture. You say 'why the fuss?' Because the implication of his 'nature' argument is that among the things about women that cannot be changed include a relatively lower ability to handle engineering and high pressure jobs. If you take issue with the quote 'saying women are biologically unsuited to engineering or high pressure jobs,' fine I'll rephrase it for you. He IMPLIED that 'women are biologically unsuited to engineering or high pressure jobs.' I'm sorry if that reaction is too 'politically correct,' but so be it. I and my fellow women engineers (not to mention our feminist ancestors) have worked too hard to accept arguments (no matter how calm or well reasoned) as to why we are not here in greater numbers and why companies shouldn't focus specifically on recruiting more of us.
1
I couldn't agree more!
It's the same misogynists behind GamerGate. Only now they're practically grown up. In a few years they'll be running for office and their childish agenda will seem perfectly normal to the next generation that comes of age.
Sad to watch the regression of feminism when so much progress had been made.
Sad to watch the regression of feminism when so much progress had been made.
4
Sorry giant multinational companies, but you have to pick a side now. Politics has destroyed this nation and made it so divided that there is no pretending to be nonpartisan anymore.
Pick a side, any side. But you cant pick neutral anymore.
Pick a side, any side. But you cant pick neutral anymore.
It only occurred to me this morning when I read that Julian Assange offered this Damore boy a job that we've been trolled. This boy knew he'd be fired. Who sends out political manifestos at work hoping to keep their job? Google had to fire him the way they'd have to fire any individual employee who damages the brand. This boy knew that. He hoped to be crucified and become an alt right martyr. Alt right terrorism strikes again and we didn't even see it coming. They're intent on destroying our institutions and way of life. We must be vigilant.
6
Google had asked for responses to its diversity efforts. Damore posted his response on an internal bulletin board. He was doing his job. The memo is not a manifesto or screed. It's an argument that responds to Google's dilemma: Why haven't its preferential/discriminatory policies and practices succeeded in improving the male/female ratio? Damore argued that population level group traits might play a role. He was actually trying to solve a problem. He made it clear, emphatically, that though males and females differed in traits at the population level, there was more overlap than difference--and population level differences could in no way be applied to individuals.
8
Ah yes, Nathan. A perfectly reasonable argument citing biological determinism as a key factor in inequality. We all know that this very line of reasoning led to discrimination of minorities, slavery of whole races of people, eugenics, and genocide. I'm tired of playing this game of "who's the real Nazi?" with the alt right sophists. The boy was fired, and right on for google asserting their power against those whose perfectly reasoned arguments would lead us backward into making white males the world's biological ideal. No. Let's not negotiate with terrorists.
1
The new far-right have exercised their First Amendment Right on YouTube, Twitter, and etc, etc, etc. In those little ponds, they are big fish with sharp teeth. Now they are in the larger lake, and think they are headed towards the rivers and seas. They have discovered there are consequences to any kind of speech, people hold them accountable to their vile and ignorant statements. They and their would be recruits will discover just how small and impotent they are when communities push-back the bullying and intimidation. Pax, jb
3
And which states in the union are doing well economically, socially, culturally? The states that voted for Trump? Let's not be fooled by their arguments, hoping to drag the rest of us down to their level.
8
This is an outrage. As someone who believes that Damore was mistreated by Google and that his memo has been misrepresented, I must also speak out to denounce this kind of action. It is destructive and backward. It is in no way justified. We have to stop taking extreme positions and demonizing people with whom we disagree. That's what led to the twitter war against Damore and to his eventual firing. That's what will now make matters worse for everyone. We've got to preserve everyone's right to have a say. We have to find ways to disagree and act effectively that do not include harming each other. Haven't we had enough of that? Google shut discussion down and resorted to harm and punishment. Let's keep discussion open, end the threats, and resort to something better.
I know that this will fall on many deaf ears but let those who have ears hear.