4 ms·

What I find particularly interesting is Uber now has someone on their board who thinks women should not be allowed to drive? It will be interesting to watch thi

What I find particularly interesting is Uber now has someone on their board who thinks women should not be allowed to drive? It will be interesting to watch this play out and take note of their policy and public statements. I can see many sources of conflict in such a decision.

dragonwriter 10y ago
Women are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia, but that doesn't mean that the particular official given a board seat believes that they shouldn't be allowed to drive (or even that the monarch believes that that's the way things should be, generally; just because its not a democracy doesn't mean that Saudi government policy isn't shaped by a desire to appeal to particular constituencies.)
- Mendenhall 10y ago
  I agree with your statement completely. The thing I notice is he works for the government and I would think he would never be able to say that openly. A competitor could instantly draw that into question and make them defend the point and use it as a propaganda tool. If he says women should be able to drive he goes against the kingdoms laws and those constituents, if he says they shouldnt or stays mute the propaganda one could spin is legion. "Uber board member thinks women shouldnt be able to drive for them"
  - morgante 10y ago
    I think you're overthinking the likelihood of that becoming a controversy. Sovereign wealth funds routinely invest in companies which run contrary to government official policies. Their foremost duty is as investment managers, not politicians.
    - Mendenhall 10y ago
      I dont think it will turn into a controversy at all, but a smart competitor versed in propaganda could easily hit that attack vector. "Ride with Uber and help raise money to suppress women!" "How do you feel as a Uber driver knowing board members dont think women should be able to drive and your actions help support that?"
      - pknerd 10y ago
        SO if a woman does not drive she is suppressed? So far no woman was elected as a President either in US. Guess women are oppressed there?
        AnAfrican 10y ago
        not being allowed to do something is oppression.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    The KSA had never had exporting Islamic law policy; they aren't al-Qaeda. There would be nothing against the government's policy about Uber having woman drivers in places that aren't KSA.
    - wavefunction 10y ago
      They just fund radical wahhabi madrassas all over Asia and the Middle East and provide support to terrorist groups like ISIS and Al Quaeda, no biggie...
      - refulgentis 10y ago
        Nonsequitor. The crown itself has no interest in spreading Wahhabism, but they do have an interest in keeping Wahhabis happy to avoid religion turning into an enemy of the state, or even worse, the state itself.
        amasad 10y ago
        It's very well-known and documented the co-evolution of Wahhabism and Al Saud. Maybe now they're cutting back and distancing themselves but the damage has been done.

dragonwriter 10y ago

Women are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia, but that doesn't mean that the particular official given a board seat believes that they shouldn't be allowed to drive (or even that the monarch believes that that's the way things should be, generally; just because its not a democracy doesn't mean that Saudi government policy isn't shaped by a desire to appeal to particular constituencies.)

Mendenhall 10y ago
I agree with your statement completely. The thing I notice is he works for the government and I would think he would never be able to say that openly. A competitor could instantly draw that into question and make them defend the point and use it as a propaganda tool. If he says women should be able to drive he goes against the kingdoms laws and those constituents, if he says they shouldnt or stays mute the propaganda one could spin is legion. "Uber board member thinks women shouldnt be able to drive for them"
- morgante 10y ago
  I think you're overthinking the likelihood of that becoming a controversy. Sovereign wealth funds routinely invest in companies which run contrary to government official policies. Their foremost duty is as investment managers, not politicians.
  - Mendenhall 10y ago
    I dont think it will turn into a controversy at all, but a smart competitor versed in propaganda could easily hit that attack vector. "Ride with Uber and help raise money to suppress women!" "How do you feel as a Uber driver knowing board members dont think women should be able to drive and your actions help support that?"
    - pknerd 10y ago
      SO if a woman does not drive she is suppressed? So far no woman was elected as a President either in US. Guess women are oppressed there?
      - AnAfrican 10y ago
        not being allowed to do something is oppression.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  The KSA had never had exporting Islamic law policy; they aren't al-Qaeda. There would be nothing against the government's policy about Uber having woman drivers in places that aren't KSA.
  - wavefunction 10y ago
    They just fund radical wahhabi madrassas all over Asia and the Middle East and provide support to terrorist groups like ISIS and Al Quaeda, no biggie...
    - refulgentis 10y ago
      Nonsequitor. The crown itself has no interest in spreading Wahhabism, but they do have an interest in keeping Wahhabis happy to avoid religion turning into an enemy of the state, or even worse, the state itself.
      - amasad 10y ago
        It's very well-known and documented the co-evolution of Wahhabism and Al Saud. Maybe now they're cutting back and distancing themselves but the damage has been done.