4 ms·

I don't mind if powerful people are being questioned. However, there's a difference between questioning someone, and making them lose their job.

TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
So they should be unaccountable?
- lmm 11y ago
  People should be accountable for their actions, not for expressing an opinion.
  - lbebber 11y ago
    No, people should be accountable for their opinions as well - you can't simply say that black people are stupid (in the John Derbyshire example) and expect that people won't get mad at you.
    - blisterpeanuts 11y ago
      People might get mad at you. The board of directors might decide you're an embarrassment to the company, and golden-parachute you. But to impose some kind of angelic, super-human behavior requirements for top business leaders seems a bit naive. Quite a few of these hard charging types who made it to the top tend to have, shall we say, unpleasant personalities.
      - TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
        Angelic and super-human? There are quite literally millions of candidates who do not have $problem in most cases.
    - lmm 11y ago
      Plenty of people were mad about the Chinese guy's comments about the stock exchange too.
  - amyjess 11y ago
    You should read the parable of The Racist Tree. http://lardcave.net/text/the_racist_tree.html http://lardcave.net/text/the_racist_tree.html
    - awakeasleep 11y ago
      This is sort of a nit-pick, and also something I think is an important distinction. It's definitely aside from the point. But that tree was tolerant at the end. That is exactly what tolerance means. Thats a very important distinction to me, because while it's all the law or government can ask of people, it misses the point that we are supposed to love our neighbors. The tree didn't open it's heart to people of different races, it didn't realize that the world is better when we love each other. All it did was tolerate.
    - lmm 11y ago
      Parables are what people do when they know they don't have a proper argument.

TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago

So they should be unaccountable?

lmm 11y ago
People should be accountable for their actions, not for expressing an opinion.
- lbebber 11y ago
  No, people should be accountable for their opinions as well - you can't simply say that black people are stupid (in the John Derbyshire example) and expect that people won't get mad at you.
  - blisterpeanuts 11y ago
    People might get mad at you. The board of directors might decide you're an embarrassment to the company, and golden-parachute you. But to impose some kind of angelic, super-human behavior requirements for top business leaders seems a bit naive. Quite a few of these hard charging types who made it to the top tend to have, shall we say, unpleasant personalities.
    - TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
      Angelic and super-human? There are quite literally millions of candidates who do not have $problem in most cases.
  - lmm 11y ago
    Plenty of people were mad about the Chinese guy's comments about the stock exchange too.
- amyjess 11y ago
  You should read the parable of The Racist Tree. http://lardcave.net/text/the_racist_tree.html http://lardcave.net/text/the_racist_tree.html
  - awakeasleep 11y ago
    This is sort of a nit-pick, and also something I think is an important distinction. It's definitely aside from the point. But that tree was tolerant at the end. That is exactly what tolerance means. Thats a very important distinction to me, because while it's all the law or government can ask of people, it misses the point that we are supposed to love our neighbors. The tree didn't open it's heart to people of different races, it didn't realize that the world is better when we love each other. All it did was tolerate.
  - lmm 11y ago
    Parables are what people do when they know they don't have a proper argument.