9 ms·

Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

62 points by alacritythief 9y ago

JadeNB 9y ago
Warning: fascinating article, but auto-playing video.
- mcguire 9y ago
  ...that cannot be paused until the ad plays.
AdeptusAquinas 9y ago
Everytime I read one of these viewpoints I hear: 'I think others should be descriminated against and for that I am getting descriminated against? How dare they descriminate against my right to descriminate!'
- mcbruiser4 9y ago
  did you read the article? both people interviewed are mostly fiscally conservative, and socially liberal or libertarian. can you explain your statement "I hear 'I think others should be descriminated against'...". perhaps it's just in your mind where you're hearing that?
- camelNotation 9y ago
  The reduction of conservative beliefs to "discrimination of others" is a lot of the problem here. Conservative politics is a broad space. Sure, there are racists and misogynists among them and they get a lot of publicity, but there are also people who believe that all human beings are equal and that something like laissez-faire capitalism leads to a more just and prosperous society for everyone. They might be mistaken in that, but it doesn't warrant accusations of malice. The fact that you sum up conservatism as "discrimination of others" is no different than any form of racism or sexism that generalizes people based on a single label. The inability to treat someone like a human being before you get to know them is why conservatives are terrified of speaking publicly in the workplace.
  - jpfed 9y ago
    Laissez-faire capitalists are a dime a dozen in technology. You cannot swing a cat without hitting a libertarian (so, you know, put the cat down). To the extent that a conservative is claiming to be discriminated against, they're not suffering for the fiscal dimension of their beliefs.
    - api 9y ago
      Libertarians aren't conservatives. Libertarianism is a different branch of the same tree as other forms of liberalism. The goal is maximization of individual human well being and potential. The disagreement is over how best to achieve that.
      - CalChris 9y ago
        Libertarians are also not libertarians. They're just disaffected Republicans. Ron Paul. Gary Johnson. Bob Barr. Et cetera.
        orwin 9y ago
        I always found it funny that the word "libertaire" (french translation of libertarian), come from the word liberal with the word "proletaire", and is now used to qualify some members of the american far-right. It was used to criticise liberal anarchism (Proudhon) because it was not socialist/egalitarist enough, and later inspired Marx (who built his theory of communism with anarchist fundation). So people in US that call themselves "libertarian" could change their names to "communists cousins", really.
        api 9y ago
        Libertarianism is a big tent. There are right-libertarians (like the ones you describe), left-libertarians, anarchist-leaning libertarians, Randian Objectivists, etc. These camps differ in numerous ways but there's a general undercurrent and large areas of agreement.
      - munk-a 9y ago
- irrational 9y ago
  Don't you think you are being a bigot when you prejudge all conservatives as wanting to discriminate against others?
  - rrauenza 9y ago
    ...or that all conservatives are Trump supporters.
  - thephyber 9y ago
    Your rush to the assumption that anyone that thinks "all conservatives" do anything as a monolith is the same class of fallacy that you suggest of others. I think everyone realizes intuitively that there is far more nuance to the world than what we type in a small comment box. I personally don't even have a sufficient vocabulary to constantly describe the nuance -- hedging every phrase in every statement just makes for muddy reading.
- patrickaljord 9y ago
  Shaming people for their opinions is a terrible tactic in a democracy. In a dictatorship it works amazing, just shame them, jail them if they persist or make them disappear if they're really stubborn. The problem with shaming people for their opinions in a democracy is that they will keep them secret all the way to the voting booth and take their revenge for the shaming there, and then everyone is surprised when candidates holding those ideas win. Maybe, if they were allowed to share their opinions publicly without being ostracized they wouldn't feel so strongly about them and they could easily be debated and proven wrong. What you're creating by shaming them is a huge hostility and a feeling of unfairness, and it just makes their will to their opinions stronger. Just some thoughts. Another point, most of our grandparents were by today's standards homophobes, racists and misogynists, should we be shaming them too? How about people living in isolated parts of the country or other countries where these opinions are still popular? When I was growing up as a kid in Syria, I remember talking to people who were totally into islamism, if it weren't for my tolerant parents, I could be holding the same beliefs today. Here's another reason for not shaming people for their opinions, most of our opinions we hold for accidental geographical or parental reasons. Shaming people for where they were born or who they grew up with has a name for it, what could it be? Discrimination.
  - notconservative 9y ago
    I can say from first hand experience that this has happened. I know several closeted conservatives at my workplace and we all know that you shouldn't share your political leanings with anyone. Luckily there is some internal diversity of opinions. So, we can confront each other without consequences on things like immigration, labor issues, free trade, and social programs. But, there are naturally areas where we all agree: guns, some other economic stuff, etc. So those opinions go completely unchallenged, where it'd be healthier to have liberal people to test those opinions.
colanderman 9y ago
Why would you not expect your co-workers to take a MAGA hat as a personal attack? The MAGA platform is associated with explicitly barring some of them from the country. Remember that even some green card holders were briefly barred from reentering. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13769#Green-card_holders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13769#Green-ca...
- nkrisc 9y ago
  Exactly. It is a personal affront. Great again for whom? Because it certainly doesn't seem like it's meant for everyone.
- majormajor 9y ago
  What if you don't have the hat but don't favor liberal immigration policies? Would expressing this political stance be taken as a personal attack? If so, that level of "we must stamp out the heresy!" is generally associated with more extreme religious types, not supposedly rational open-minded people. And that's where the danger lies: once you stop permitting the expression of contrary views, your ability to argue against them will atrophy.
  - colanderman 9y ago
    If your political belief, implemented, would directly and immediately destroy my or my loved ones' lives, keep it the hell out of the workplace.
  - hasbroslasher 9y ago
    The problem, of course, is that there's no way to tell from outward appearances what someone believes. A good example of this is the appropriation of Satanic imagery in rock music: few of these bands are theistic or LaVeyan Satanists, most of them are just doing it to send a message. The connotation of pentagrams and upside down crosses is "watch out, I'm evil, I like evil things, etc". Conservative Christians, however, often don't realize this and legitimately believe these people to be agents of the Devil, when usually they're just trying to provoke a reaction. There's a layer of semiotics that's important to any outward appearance. Wearing a swastika but saying "Nonono it's a Hindu symbol of fertility" probably wouldn't go over well. Nor would saying "Well I didn't like the Holocaust but I really did think the Nazis had some good ideas about things". Similarly, wearing a hammer and sickle shirt will get you into trouble in more conservative places. The MAGA hat's obviously on a different level than that, but it does explain some of the reasoning. That hat in particular represents (sometimes fanatical) appreciation for a man that liberals believe is doing immense harm to our nation, it's citizens and its image via racist, reactionary and backwards-looking politics. Because of far-right extremists, I get scared when I see that hat, to me it signals some form of white supremacy that I need to stay away from. So yes, wearing it at work might make people uncomfortable.
nkrisc 9y ago
As someone who is in no way a part of Silicon Valley: does anyone really care how fiscally conservative or liberal you are? I always thought it was the social issues that caused the problem. Whether it's misrepresenting statistics to justify sexism or saying that some people deserve less rights because of their sexual orientation.
- camelNotation 9y ago
  It may have been the social issues at one point, but the Marxist influence is so significant that there's no longer any real separation between social and economic issues on the left. In their minds, economic disparities breed social inequities and vice versa. They may be right in principle, but it doesn't leave a gray area or room for common ground.
- CalChris 9y ago
  MAGA has nothing to do with fiscal conservatism. As in Zero. Nada. Zilch. President Obama was quite fiscally conservative.
  - rrauenza 9y ago
    ...as was Bill Clinton as well!
    - CalChris 9y ago
      ...as was Carter. ...as wasn't Ronald Reagan, H and W and as isn't Cheeto. Republicans are in no shape or form, fiscally conservative. They are anti-tax. But they'll happily spend the seed corn on defense, or rather, on right wing socialism.
fossuser 9y ago
"John: If I walked into work with a "Make America Great Again" hat, there would be repercussions. Quite a few people would take it as a personal affront, and I would expect to be out of the company within weeks, if not a month." If someone walked in with a young earth creationist hat I would similarly question their ability to think critically (and have a hard time not just categorizing them as stupid). Is this really about politics? It's not because they're 'conservative', it's just given access to the same available information some conclusions are just weak and it's reasonable to lose respect for people when they hold them.
- lambdaphagy 9y ago
  "It's not because of politics, it's because my political opponents are objectively dumb."
  - UncleSlacky 9y ago
    This, but unironically.
    - lambdaphagy 9y ago
      Among the very smartest people I know, I count both Trump supporters and anyone-but-Trump supporters. If you don't know any smart people who disagree with you, consider the possibility that you may be living in a kind of intellectual Mauritius.
      - marcelluspye 9y ago
        >Among the very smartest people I know, I count both Trump supporters and anyone-but-Trump supporters. Not the guy you were replying to, but I can't say the same. I know plenty of smart conservatives, and plenty of smart republicans, (some of whom may have voted for Trump), but of the very few Trump supporters I know, I would definitely not say they're among the smartest I know. An even fewer number of times have I talked to someone with a MAGA hat, and every single one of those times the hat's owner has said something blatantly ignorant, racist or sexist. Are there smart trump supporters? I'm sure there are some. Do I feel like I'm losing anything by not associating with them? No, not really.
creaghpatr 9y ago
Why do people voice personal political views at work? Is this a California thing?
- rconti 9y ago
  No.
- pg_bot 9y ago
  A surprisingly large number of people wear their political opinions on their sleeves. During the election last year I saw a few people in my office with Hillary Clinton action figures. (this was in NYC)
- brightsize 9y ago
  Sometimes it comes from the top. "Managers and supervisors can now legally require their workers to participate in politics as a condition of employment. For instance, in most states, managers have the legal right to mandate worker attendance at a political rally for a favored candidate—and fire or punish workers who decline to participate."[1] "On August 14 th 2012, GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney visited an Ohio coal mine to give a speech attacking the energy policies of opponent Barack Obama. A campaign stop such as this one might not seem that unusual in the midst of a heated presidential election. But this event was different, as the owners of the coal mine had told their workers that attendance at the rally would be both mandatory and unpaid." [2] "Private employers can distribute materials that tell all their workers the company's positions on political issues. And if your boss were to send an email urging you to attend a rally for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton this weekend, because electing his favorite candidate is 'essential for the future of the company,' legal experts say he'd be within his rights to do it." [3] [1] http://prospect.org/article/employer-political-coercion-growing-threat http://prospect.org/article/employer-political-coercion-grow... [2] http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/ahertel/files/empmobilpop.pdf http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/ahertel/files/empmobilpop.p... [3] http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-boss-politics-at-work-20161021-story.html http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-boss-politics-at-w...
- VLM 9y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entryism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entryism Its worth noting its not limited solely to one side.
notconservative 9y ago
The ultimate irony is that many conservatives will hesitate before commenting on this here, because people don't want to be on the receiving end of a torrent of downvotes.
- w0m 9y ago
  You can downvote?
  - pg_bot 9y ago
    After you reach a certain number of upvotes yes. (I believe 500)
    - thephyber 9y ago
      Heh. Given the parent's question, your response, and your username, I thought you were an FAQ bot written by Paul Graham.
      - notconservative 9y ago
        I was thinking the same thing! I was thinking about what NLP / ML you could whip up to answer these kinds of basic questions. It could auto-reply to the super common things: - Didn't read the article - Why can't I downvote - Title doesn't match the article - No asking for upvotes
- tasty_freeze 9y ago
  Anyone who cares about downvotes is a shallow idiot. I can think of more serious consequences, but caring about getting greyed out on HN is not one of them.
  - notconservative 9y ago
    My main account is my reputation on the internet. That means there literally would be "serious consequences" if I posted conservative opinions. So, yeah. I'm a shallow idiot for not wanting to get fired.
jerkstate 9y ago
Ignoring for a moment the moral judgement of whether conservatism is "right" or "wrong" ... I imagine this is probably how closeted gay people felt for a long time, and still do outside of places like the Bay Area. It's poetic justice. The playing field will probably wobble back and forth for a little while and white conservative men will learn to play by the new rules - claiming victim status is as good a place to start as any.
- quotemstr 9y ago
  When I was a child, I was taught that two wrongs don't make a right.
  - jerkstate 9y ago
    so you're saying it's wrong to shame/shun/undermine those at work because you disagree with their opinions on public policy?
    - quotemstr 9y ago
      I am saying that it's wrong to shame people at work for their political opinions and I can't fucking believe that this stance is controversial. I will go further and say that politics doesn't belong at work.
      - maxerickson 9y ago
        Our words are insufficient. I guess you are talking about big issue politics when you say they don't belong at work, because it is absurd to say that people shouldn't consider the political consequences of the things they create or actions they take on behalf of their jobs.
    - RightMillennial 9y ago
      That sounds awfully toxic. Isn't it wrong? Work should be a professional environment where your political opinions are completely irrelevant.
pklausler 9y ago
One of the problems that we face in the US today is that our two political parties, which once divided the electorate across fault lines of policy or values, now appear to have reshuffled the electorate across epistemologies. I sincerely believe that one party now provides a happier home for those who prefer empirical science.
- rrauenza 9y ago
  It depends on the issue (edit: and how it fits with their world view). The left can also be irrational when it comes to science on some issues as well: http://www.realclearscience.com/journal_club/2014/10/20/are_liberals_or_conservatives_more_anti-vaccine_108905.html http://www.realclearscience.com/journal_club/2014/10/20/are_... Ending quote: >The bottom line is that the CDC data makes it very difficult to argue that conservatives and liberals share equal blame in the anti-vaccine war. Anti-vaxxers are clearly more associated with the political Left. I would tend to agree the left's leadership, however, tends to be less anti-science.
  - RickJWag 9y ago
    You forgot the absolute truth that a 36 week old baby is in fact a baby. To pretend otherwise (to justify murdering it) is just plain denial.
- johngalt 9y ago
  It is entirely dependent on the subject matter. Talking climate science with republicans is similar to talking about economics with democrats.
hasbroslasher 9y ago
I've worked places (not in tech) where I was not allowed to talk about my support for Barack Obama for fear of being shouted down, mocked, or forced to listen to racist diatribes about his history. I have been on the other side of this kind of bullshit. I moved from the small, Midwestern town that harbored these people and their insane beliefs to a liberal, coastal city that "gets" me a little more. I'm happier for it. I work with other coastal liberals and none of us have much respect for anyone who out-and-out supports Donald Trump, and we probably won't any time soon. A lot of us share this background. I suggest these men do the same. Move to Dallas or New York or somewhere where conservatism is a little more appreciated. Move to Denver or Atlanta. Find somewhere that feels like home, where there are other conservative techies. Claiming the victim status as a white man in the most expensive city, in the highest paying industry comes off as a little entitled, at least to me.
- jbattle 9y ago
  I'd suggest the golden rule should be applicable here. There are enough divisions in our society as it is - I don't believe that literal segregation by political preference is a good solution, an any timeframe
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- notconservative 9y ago
  I did that recently, moved from the Bay Area to a red state. But, what about the concept of engaging with and challenging people who have different beliefs? People don't really change their minds when you call them a racist, fire them, etc. When I am talking to a liberal who I know wont try to cause problems for me (like getting me fired), I will ask lots of questions. Why do you believe X? What facts support that opinion? I believe Y because ..., where do you think the flaw in my logic is? Why do you think value A is more important that counter-value B? It's really depressing that someone such as yourself, who has known what it is to be descriminated against for what you think are reasonable beliefs, would perpetuate the same against others. If you think someone's views are wrong, then ask them why they think that. At worst, you'll get a better insight into how to point out why they are wrong. At best, you'll have a chance of convincing them that your position is better.
Upvoter33 9y ago
Honestly, why don't people keep their politics out of the workplace entirely? Unless you are working at a lobbying firm or whatever, work should be about work, not about being a place to discuss gun rights, abortion, or immigration.
- munk-a 9y ago
  Side note, if you work for a lobbying firm can you also not discuss gun rights, abortion, or immigration in the work place... or anything... In fact, can you just find a new job and stop trying to make your voice heard louder than others.
  - jdavis703 9y ago
    One of the tough pieces of democracies is ensuring that any group outside of the majority gets equal treatment. For example, the majority of Americans don't know much about agronomics and agriculture policy, so it helps if farmers can ensure that politicians and regulators also hear their voices. The problem arises when you have super-lobbyists like the Jack Abramoffs and Paul Manaforts of the world manipulating politicians on issues that are clearly detrimental to society, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
- lj3 9y ago
  > Honestly, why don't people keep their politics out of the workplace entirely? Because the US is in the middle of a cold civil war that's heating up fast. Denying your enemy employment and therefore bankrupting them is remarkably effective.
  - Balgair 9y ago
    > cold civil war 1st International Cyber War
  - leereeves 9y ago
    > Denying your enemy employment and therefore bankrupting them is remarkably effective. Bankrupting your enemy is mostly effective at further radicalizing them and inspiring violence. That attitude would make this "cold civil war" a hot war.
bllguo 9y ago
People pretend it's just a disagreement in political opinion. There's obviously a line here. "Racial purity" was a political stance of the Nazis. Yet espouse Nazi beliefs in the workplace and you'll be rightfully attacked. You can't hide behind "it's just politics" forever.
- RightMillennial 9y ago
  Godwin's law triumphs again. I am sick of this gross, disingenuous accusation that all Conservatives must be Nazis. Conservatives are not Nazis, do not espouse Nazi beliefs, and downright reject Naziism. Just because there is some fringe group that is labeled "right" (or "alt-right") on the extremely vague political spectrum that may have Neo-nazi members, does not mean there is any remote commonality with Conservatives.
alexryan 9y ago
Sorry, but if you don't have the courage to speak your truth, then you deserve the chains of slavery that you choose to wear and the dearth of self-respect that comes with it.
- erik_seaberg 9y ago
  > When you find something you can't say, what do you do with it? My advice is, don't say it. Or at least, pick your battles. - http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html
yosho 9y ago
Yeah there's definitely some things that are taboo to talk about because it's too political. I for one, am a liberal gun owner, which gives me a unique perspective in that I understand where a lot of liberals are coming from, but I also understand how conservatives feel when liberals constantly attack their viewpoints and try to silence them. It's funny how many debates I get into with other liberals about guns when they've never held or shot a gun in their life and yet claim to know everything about it. And the amount of moral superiority they hold around their viewpoints is staggering, truly a "I'm right you're wrong and an idiot" mentality. If there's one thing I recommend everyone to do is just listen to the other side and at least TRY to see their perspective even if you disagree.
notacoward 9y ago
Nice little plug for Quora there. Probably tells us something about who "John" really is. For the record, Quora is a very poor place to have such debates. It's a very strict question and answer format, with many "why did Obama kill a hundred babies and drink their blood" questions on every political topic. Just about any other place, including here, is better for a political debate.

62 points by alacritythief 9y ago

JadeNB 9y ago

Warning: fascinating article, but auto-playing video.

mcguire 9y ago
...that cannot be paused until the ad plays.

AdeptusAquinas 9y ago

Everytime I read one of these viewpoints I hear: 'I think others should be descriminated against and for that I am getting descriminated against? How dare they descriminate against my right to descriminate!'

mcbruiser4 9y ago
did you read the article? both people interviewed are mostly fiscally conservative, and socially liberal or libertarian. can you explain your statement "I hear 'I think others should be descriminated against'...". perhaps it's just in your mind where you're hearing that?
camelNotation 9y ago
The reduction of conservative beliefs to "discrimination of others" is a lot of the problem here. Conservative politics is a broad space. Sure, there are racists and misogynists among them and they get a lot of publicity, but there are also people who believe that all human beings are equal and that something like laissez-faire capitalism leads to a more just and prosperous society for everyone. They might be mistaken in that, but it doesn't warrant accusations of malice. The fact that you sum up conservatism as "discrimination of others" is no different than any form of racism or sexism that generalizes people based on a single label. The inability to treat someone like a human being before you get to know them is why conservatives are terrified of speaking publicly in the workplace.
- jpfed 9y ago
  Laissez-faire capitalists are a dime a dozen in technology. You cannot swing a cat without hitting a libertarian (so, you know, put the cat down). To the extent that a conservative is claiming to be discriminated against, they're not suffering for the fiscal dimension of their beliefs.
  - api 9y ago
    Libertarians aren't conservatives. Libertarianism is a different branch of the same tree as other forms of liberalism. The goal is maximization of individual human well being and potential. The disagreement is over how best to achieve that.
    - CalChris 9y ago
      Libertarians are also not libertarians. They're just disaffected Republicans. Ron Paul. Gary Johnson. Bob Barr. Et cetera.
      - orwin 9y ago
        I always found it funny that the word "libertaire" (french translation of libertarian), come from the word liberal with the word "proletaire", and is now used to qualify some members of the american far-right. It was used to criticise liberal anarchism (Proudhon) because it was not socialist/egalitarist enough, and later inspired Marx (who built his theory of communism with anarchist fundation). So people in US that call themselves "libertarian" could change their names to "communists cousins", really.
      - api 9y ago
        Libertarianism is a big tent. There are right-libertarians (like the ones you describe), left-libertarians, anarchist-leaning libertarians, Randian Objectivists, etc. These camps differ in numerous ways but there's a general undercurrent and large areas of agreement.
    - munk-a 9y ago
irrational 9y ago
Don't you think you are being a bigot when you prejudge all conservatives as wanting to discriminate against others?
- rrauenza 9y ago
  ...or that all conservatives are Trump supporters.
- thephyber 9y ago
  Your rush to the assumption that anyone that thinks "all conservatives" do anything as a monolith is the same class of fallacy that you suggest of others. I think everyone realizes intuitively that there is far more nuance to the world than what we type in a small comment box. I personally don't even have a sufficient vocabulary to constantly describe the nuance -- hedging every phrase in every statement just makes for muddy reading.
patrickaljord 9y ago
Shaming people for their opinions is a terrible tactic in a democracy. In a dictatorship it works amazing, just shame them, jail them if they persist or make them disappear if they're really stubborn. The problem with shaming people for their opinions in a democracy is that they will keep them secret all the way to the voting booth and take their revenge for the shaming there, and then everyone is surprised when candidates holding those ideas win. Maybe, if they were allowed to share their opinions publicly without being ostracized they wouldn't feel so strongly about them and they could easily be debated and proven wrong. What you're creating by shaming them is a huge hostility and a feeling of unfairness, and it just makes their will to their opinions stronger. Just some thoughts. Another point, most of our grandparents were by today's standards homophobes, racists and misogynists, should we be shaming them too? How about people living in isolated parts of the country or other countries where these opinions are still popular? When I was growing up as a kid in Syria, I remember talking to people who were totally into islamism, if it weren't for my tolerant parents, I could be holding the same beliefs today. Here's another reason for not shaming people for their opinions, most of our opinions we hold for accidental geographical or parental reasons. Shaming people for where they were born or who they grew up with has a name for it, what could it be? Discrimination.
- notconservative 9y ago
  I can say from first hand experience that this has happened. I know several closeted conservatives at my workplace and we all know that you shouldn't share your political leanings with anyone. Luckily there is some internal diversity of opinions. So, we can confront each other without consequences on things like immigration, labor issues, free trade, and social programs. But, there are naturally areas where we all agree: guns, some other economic stuff, etc. So those opinions go completely unchallenged, where it'd be healthier to have liberal people to test those opinions.

colanderman 9y ago

Why would you not expect your co-workers to take a MAGA hat as a personal attack? The MAGA platform is associated with explicitly barring some of them from the country. Remember that even some green card holders were briefly barred from reentering. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13769#Green-card_holders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13769#Green-ca...

nkrisc 9y ago
Exactly. It is a personal affront. Great again for whom? Because it certainly doesn't seem like it's meant for everyone.
majormajor 9y ago
What if you don't have the hat but don't favor liberal immigration policies? Would expressing this political stance be taken as a personal attack? If so, that level of "we must stamp out the heresy!" is generally associated with more extreme religious types, not supposedly rational open-minded people. And that's where the danger lies: once you stop permitting the expression of contrary views, your ability to argue against them will atrophy.
- colanderman 9y ago
  If your political belief, implemented, would directly and immediately destroy my or my loved ones' lives, keep it the hell out of the workplace.
- hasbroslasher 9y ago
  The problem, of course, is that there's no way to tell from outward appearances what someone believes. A good example of this is the appropriation of Satanic imagery in rock music: few of these bands are theistic or LaVeyan Satanists, most of them are just doing it to send a message. The connotation of pentagrams and upside down crosses is "watch out, I'm evil, I like evil things, etc". Conservative Christians, however, often don't realize this and legitimately believe these people to be agents of the Devil, when usually they're just trying to provoke a reaction. There's a layer of semiotics that's important to any outward appearance. Wearing a swastika but saying "Nonono it's a Hindu symbol of fertility" probably wouldn't go over well. Nor would saying "Well I didn't like the Holocaust but I really did think the Nazis had some good ideas about things". Similarly, wearing a hammer and sickle shirt will get you into trouble in more conservative places. The MAGA hat's obviously on a different level than that, but it does explain some of the reasoning. That hat in particular represents (sometimes fanatical) appreciation for a man that liberals believe is doing immense harm to our nation, it's citizens and its image via racist, reactionary and backwards-looking politics. Because of far-right extremists, I get scared when I see that hat, to me it signals some form of white supremacy that I need to stay away from. So yes, wearing it at work might make people uncomfortable.

nkrisc 9y ago

As someone who is in no way a part of Silicon Valley: does anyone really care how fiscally conservative or liberal you are? I always thought it was the social issues that caused the problem. Whether it's misrepresenting statistics to justify sexism or saying that some people deserve less rights because of their sexual orientation.

camelNotation 9y ago
It may have been the social issues at one point, but the Marxist influence is so significant that there's no longer any real separation between social and economic issues on the left. In their minds, economic disparities breed social inequities and vice versa. They may be right in principle, but it doesn't leave a gray area or room for common ground.
CalChris 9y ago
MAGA has nothing to do with fiscal conservatism. As in Zero. Nada. Zilch. President Obama was quite fiscally conservative.
- rrauenza 9y ago
  ...as was Bill Clinton as well!
  - CalChris 9y ago
    ...as was Carter. ...as wasn't Ronald Reagan, H and W and as isn't Cheeto. Republicans are in no shape or form, fiscally conservative. They are anti-tax. But they'll happily spend the seed corn on defense, or rather, on right wing socialism.

fossuser 9y ago

"John: If I walked into work with a "Make America Great Again" hat, there would be repercussions. Quite a few people would take it as a personal affront, and I would expect to be out of the company within weeks, if not a month." If someone walked in with a young earth creationist hat I would similarly question their ability to think critically (and have a hard time not just categorizing them as stupid). Is this really about politics? It's not because they're 'conservative', it's just given access to the same available information some conclusions are just weak and it's reasonable to lose respect for people when they hold them.

lambdaphagy 9y ago
"It's not because of politics, it's because my political opponents are objectively dumb."
- UncleSlacky 9y ago
  This, but unironically.
  - lambdaphagy 9y ago
    Among the very smartest people I know, I count both Trump supporters and anyone-but-Trump supporters. If you don't know any smart people who disagree with you, consider the possibility that you may be living in a kind of intellectual Mauritius.
    - marcelluspye 9y ago
      >Among the very smartest people I know, I count both Trump supporters and anyone-but-Trump supporters. Not the guy you were replying to, but I can't say the same. I know plenty of smart conservatives, and plenty of smart republicans, (some of whom may have voted for Trump), but of the very few Trump supporters I know, I would definitely not say they're among the smartest I know. An even fewer number of times have I talked to someone with a MAGA hat, and every single one of those times the hat's owner has said something blatantly ignorant, racist or sexist. Are there smart trump supporters? I'm sure there are some. Do I feel like I'm losing anything by not associating with them? No, not really.

creaghpatr 9y ago

Why do people voice personal political views at work? Is this a California thing?

rconti 9y ago
No.
pg_bot 9y ago
A surprisingly large number of people wear their political opinions on their sleeves. During the election last year I saw a few people in my office with Hillary Clinton action figures. (this was in NYC)
brightsize 9y ago
Sometimes it comes from the top. "Managers and supervisors can now legally require their workers to participate in politics as a condition of employment. For instance, in most states, managers have the legal right to mandate worker attendance at a political rally for a favored candidate—and fire or punish workers who decline to participate."[1] "On August 14 th 2012, GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney visited an Ohio coal mine to give a speech attacking the energy policies of opponent Barack Obama. A campaign stop such as this one might not seem that unusual in the midst of a heated presidential election. But this event was different, as the owners of the coal mine had told their workers that attendance at the rally would be both mandatory and unpaid." [2] "Private employers can distribute materials that tell all their workers the company's positions on political issues. And if your boss were to send an email urging you to attend a rally for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton this weekend, because electing his favorite candidate is 'essential for the future of the company,' legal experts say he'd be within his rights to do it." [3] [1] http://prospect.org/article/employer-political-coercion-growing-threat http://prospect.org/article/employer-political-coercion-grow... [2] http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/ahertel/files/empmobilpop.pdf http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/ahertel/files/empmobilpop.p... [3] http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-boss-politics-at-work-20161021-story.html http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-boss-politics-at-w...
VLM 9y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entryism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entryism Its worth noting its not limited solely to one side.

notconservative 9y ago

The ultimate irony is that many conservatives will hesitate before commenting on this here, because people don't want to be on the receiving end of a torrent of downvotes.

w0m 9y ago
You can downvote?
- pg_bot 9y ago
  After you reach a certain number of upvotes yes. (I believe 500)
  - thephyber 9y ago
    Heh. Given the parent's question, your response, and your username, I thought you were an FAQ bot written by Paul Graham.
    - notconservative 9y ago
      I was thinking the same thing! I was thinking about what NLP / ML you could whip up to answer these kinds of basic questions. It could auto-reply to the super common things: - Didn't read the article - Why can't I downvote - Title doesn't match the article - No asking for upvotes
tasty_freeze 9y ago
Anyone who cares about downvotes is a shallow idiot. I can think of more serious consequences, but caring about getting greyed out on HN is not one of them.
- notconservative 9y ago
  My main account is my reputation on the internet. That means there literally would be "serious consequences" if I posted conservative opinions. So, yeah. I'm a shallow idiot for not wanting to get fired.

jerkstate 9y ago

Ignoring for a moment the moral judgement of whether conservatism is "right" or "wrong" ... I imagine this is probably how closeted gay people felt for a long time, and still do outside of places like the Bay Area. It's poetic justice. The playing field will probably wobble back and forth for a little while and white conservative men will learn to play by the new rules - claiming victim status is as good a place to start as any.

quotemstr 9y ago
When I was a child, I was taught that two wrongs don't make a right.
- jerkstate 9y ago
  so you're saying it's wrong to shame/shun/undermine those at work because you disagree with their opinions on public policy?
  - quotemstr 9y ago
    I am saying that it's wrong to shame people at work for their political opinions and I can't fucking believe that this stance is controversial. I will go further and say that politics doesn't belong at work.
    - maxerickson 9y ago
      Our words are insufficient. I guess you are talking about big issue politics when you say they don't belong at work, because it is absurd to say that people shouldn't consider the political consequences of the things they create or actions they take on behalf of their jobs.
  - RightMillennial 9y ago
    That sounds awfully toxic. Isn't it wrong? Work should be a professional environment where your political opinions are completely irrelevant.

pklausler 9y ago

One of the problems that we face in the US today is that our two political parties, which once divided the electorate across fault lines of policy or values, now appear to have reshuffled the electorate across epistemologies. I sincerely believe that one party now provides a happier home for those who prefer empirical science.

rrauenza 9y ago
It depends on the issue (edit: and how it fits with their world view). The left can also be irrational when it comes to science on some issues as well: http://www.realclearscience.com/journal_club/2014/10/20/are_liberals_or_conservatives_more_anti-vaccine_108905.html http://www.realclearscience.com/journal_club/2014/10/20/are_... Ending quote: >The bottom line is that the CDC data makes it very difficult to argue that conservatives and liberals share equal blame in the anti-vaccine war. Anti-vaxxers are clearly more associated with the political Left. I would tend to agree the left's leadership, however, tends to be less anti-science.
- RickJWag 9y ago
  You forgot the absolute truth that a 36 week old baby is in fact a baby. To pretend otherwise (to justify murdering it) is just plain denial.
johngalt 9y ago
It is entirely dependent on the subject matter. Talking climate science with republicans is similar to talking about economics with democrats.

hasbroslasher 9y ago

I've worked places (not in tech) where I was not allowed to talk about my support for Barack Obama for fear of being shouted down, mocked, or forced to listen to racist diatribes about his history. I have been on the other side of this kind of bullshit. I moved from the small, Midwestern town that harbored these people and their insane beliefs to a liberal, coastal city that "gets" me a little more. I'm happier for it. I work with other coastal liberals and none of us have much respect for anyone who out-and-out supports Donald Trump, and we probably won't any time soon. A lot of us share this background. I suggest these men do the same. Move to Dallas or New York or somewhere where conservatism is a little more appreciated. Move to Denver or Atlanta. Find somewhere that feels like home, where there are other conservative techies. Claiming the victim status as a white man in the most expensive city, in the highest paying industry comes off as a little entitled, at least to me.

jbattle 9y ago
I'd suggest the golden rule should be applicable here. There are enough divisions in our society as it is - I don't believe that literal segregation by political preference is a good solution, an any timeframe
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
notconservative 9y ago
I did that recently, moved from the Bay Area to a red state. But, what about the concept of engaging with and challenging people who have different beliefs? People don't really change their minds when you call them a racist, fire them, etc. When I am talking to a liberal who I know wont try to cause problems for me (like getting me fired), I will ask lots of questions. Why do you believe X? What facts support that opinion? I believe Y because ..., where do you think the flaw in my logic is? Why do you think value A is more important that counter-value B? It's really depressing that someone such as yourself, who has known what it is to be descriminated against for what you think are reasonable beliefs, would perpetuate the same against others. If you think someone's views are wrong, then ask them why they think that. At worst, you'll get a better insight into how to point out why they are wrong. At best, you'll have a chance of convincing them that your position is better.

Upvoter33 9y ago

Honestly, why don't people keep their politics out of the workplace entirely? Unless you are working at a lobbying firm or whatever, work should be about work, not about being a place to discuss gun rights, abortion, or immigration.

munk-a 9y ago
Side note, if you work for a lobbying firm can you also not discuss gun rights, abortion, or immigration in the work place... or anything... In fact, can you just find a new job and stop trying to make your voice heard louder than others.
- jdavis703 9y ago
  One of the tough pieces of democracies is ensuring that any group outside of the majority gets equal treatment. For example, the majority of Americans don't know much about agronomics and agriculture policy, so it helps if farmers can ensure that politicians and regulators also hear their voices. The problem arises when you have super-lobbyists like the Jack Abramoffs and Paul Manaforts of the world manipulating politicians on issues that are clearly detrimental to society, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
lj3 9y ago
> Honestly, why don't people keep their politics out of the workplace entirely? Because the US is in the middle of a cold civil war that's heating up fast. Denying your enemy employment and therefore bankrupting them is remarkably effective.
- Balgair 9y ago
  > cold civil war 1st International Cyber War
- leereeves 9y ago
  > Denying your enemy employment and therefore bankrupting them is remarkably effective. Bankrupting your enemy is mostly effective at further radicalizing them and inspiring violence. That attitude would make this "cold civil war" a hot war.

bllguo 9y ago

People pretend it's just a disagreement in political opinion. There's obviously a line here. "Racial purity" was a political stance of the Nazis. Yet espouse Nazi beliefs in the workplace and you'll be rightfully attacked. You can't hide behind "it's just politics" forever.

RightMillennial 9y ago
Godwin's law triumphs again. I am sick of this gross, disingenuous accusation that all Conservatives must be Nazis. Conservatives are not Nazis, do not espouse Nazi beliefs, and downright reject Naziism. Just because there is some fringe group that is labeled "right" (or "alt-right") on the extremely vague political spectrum that may have Neo-nazi members, does not mean there is any remote commonality with Conservatives.

alexryan 9y ago

Sorry, but if you don't have the courage to speak your truth, then you deserve the chains of slavery that you choose to wear and the dearth of self-respect that comes with it.

erik_seaberg 9y ago
> When you find something you can't say, what do you do with it? My advice is, don't say it. Or at least, pick your battles. - http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html

yosho 9y ago

Yeah there's definitely some things that are taboo to talk about because it's too political. I for one, am a liberal gun owner, which gives me a unique perspective in that I understand where a lot of liberals are coming from, but I also understand how conservatives feel when liberals constantly attack their viewpoints and try to silence them. It's funny how many debates I get into with other liberals about guns when they've never held or shot a gun in their life and yet claim to know everything about it. And the amount of moral superiority they hold around their viewpoints is staggering, truly a "I'm right you're wrong and an idiot" mentality. If there's one thing I recommend everyone to do is just listen to the other side and at least TRY to see their perspective even if you disagree.

notacoward 9y ago

Nice little plug for Quora there. Probably tells us something about who "John" really is. For the record, Quora is a very poor place to have such debates. It's a very strict question and answer format, with many "why did Obama kill a hundred babies and drink their blood" questions on every political topic. Just about any other place, including here, is better for a political debate.