6 ms·

What topics, exactly, are so taboo? McCarthyism was about a specific ideology. And, mind you, people were getting dragged into court over it, which Ferris is ce

What topics, exactly, are so taboo? McCarthyism was about a specific ideology. And, mind you, people were getting dragged into court over it, which Ferris is certainly not at risk of. In fact, this is in a thread about a guy who shut a media outlet down. What is Ferris worried that he can't talk about?

jbooth 9y ago
There are a tiny minority of liberals who, rather than embracing breaking down barriers and a hunky-dory co-existence like the rest of us, erect barriers of purity and constantly call people out. They're annoying. On the other hand, that's the dominant mode for the entire right half of the spectrum so take their complaints with a grain of salt. And who gives the above-mentioned annoying liberals their biggest platform? Right wing media. Gotta feed the wurlitzer. It's not a "differing and diverse political opinion" to think people of color and women are inherently less worthy, it's just racist/sexist.
- sgift 9y ago
  > It's not a "differing and diverse political opinion" to think people of color and women are inherently less worthy, it's just racist/sexist. It actually is both, which neatly answers the "why are you against diverse political opinions": Saying something is 'just' an 'opinion' doesn't absolve it from being racist/sexist.
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
  Still no one is willing to name the beliefs that 'you just can't say.' In McCarthyism it was communist/socialist beliefs. What political beliefs can't you espouse in public without being shunned? For Thiel it's probably the pro-authoritarian/pseudo-monarchist beliefs of the neo-reaction guys he runs around with. Gotta be honest, I don't mind those being shunned.
  - ViktorV 9y ago
    You just named some of the beliefs that you can't say. Basically you agree with Thiel. One more thing to note: you've called the guy "pro-authoritarian/pseudo-monarchist". Is this how he describes himself ( I guess no )? I grew up in a country with strong far-right culture. Nazis are calling themselves nazis.
    - frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
      Peter Thiel himself doesn't describe himself that way but the people he pays attention to explicitly do. Here: Yarvin told Yiannopoulos that he had been “coaching Thiel.” “Peter needs guidance on politics for sure,” Yiannopoulos responded. “Less than you might think!” Yarvin wrote back. “I watched the election at his house, I think my hangover lasted into Tuesday. He’s fully enlightened, just plays it very carefully.” and then combine that with the fact that Yarvin calls himself a Jacobite and you've got the monarchy/authoritarian connection. The Thiel thing goes a whole lot deeper than Damore or some of the other common examples of "SJW" pushback.
  - Taylor_OD 9y ago
    I replied with a few and was downvoted.
- AstralStorm 9y ago
  Self described liberals. What happened to "live and let live"? At some point using too much violence turns even this into a thinly veiled religion with witch hunts. The cure is measuring impact and the results of interventions accurately.
cm2187 9y ago
I understand the grievance against McCarthyism was mostly about preventing people from getting work if they held the wrong political views. In that respect what Thiel complains about isn't too dissimilar.
malvosenior 9y ago
James Damore was fired from Google for posting his opinion on a private company board that solicited said opinion. I'd say that what he said is pretty taboo in SV.
- francisofascii 9y ago
  Brenden Eich is a another notable name that comes to mind.
- cm2187 9y ago
  Particularly given that what the way he expressed his opinion may have been clumsy but it wasn't at all the anti-women manifest that I heard decried in the media.
- deong 9y ago
  I'm not sure why it seems so revelatory to people that there are some opinions you don't get to express out loud without consequence, even if you're asked about them. If my boss says, "Hey deong, what do you think about black people?", that's not a get-out-of-jail-free card for me to start dropping n-bombs. There's one answer you're allowed to give to that question, and it's not because there's some conspiracy to oppress dissenting opinions. It's because there are extremely reasonable standards for employment that include not shouting racial epithets and white supremacist propaganda. Being asked your opinion doesn't change the rules. Damore was certainly less inflammatory than that, but the point remains. You can argue that his opinions didn't warrant firing, but there's no reasonable way to argue that because he was responding to requests for comment, it's unethical or otherwise shady to hold him accountable for those comments.
  - malvosenior 9y ago
    The problem is that on the flip side of the coin what is allowed to be said at Google is much more inflammatory than anything Damore said. It's not even just tolerated but celebrated. You use racism as an example but what Damore said was not racist, he didn't use any epithets, he isn't a white supremacist. It's really odd that you try to lump him in with them.
pj_mukh 9y ago
No one's been able to give me a straight answer to this very simple question (I live in the Bay area).
- RestlessMind 9y ago
  I just gave an example in a sibling comment (tl;dr: illegal immigration).
  - pj_mukh 9y ago
    I personally know 3-4 people who are loudly vocal against illegal immigration working at FANG. I'd like to control it myself. We just differ on strategies on how to do so. As long as you are not yelling at your Hispanic co-workers about building a wall, you'll be fine. Again, this seems to be a made-up narrative.
Taylor_OD 9y ago
I'd imagine being a outspoken Trump supporter would have some fairly serious negative consequences at many companies in the bay. A lot of right wing political opinion would probably be in the same boat. Being pro life or against gay marriage both come to mind as opinions one may have that would immediately change others opinions about them. I'm not defending these opinions rather the belief that just because someone believes something different than me doesn't mean we are destined to vilify each other.
ythn 9y ago
Saying anything politically uncorrect, for one, will draw accusations of bigotry, sexism, racism, and more...
BeetleB 9y ago
I don't live in they Bay area, but from what I keep seeing on HN: A strong hostility to those who say things that support a particular policy that Trump supports. An extreme hostility to those who admit voting for him. I'm pretty sure I have seen comments on HN which pretty strongly hint that the commenters feel Trump supporters should have no place in SV tech companies, because they are, by virtue of supporting him, bigots. These were not greyed out comments, either. Oh, and comments like these: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16384641 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16384641 (Really hard to tell if it is just bait, though).
ViktorV 9y ago
The taboo is that differences between groups of people could be caused by something else than systematic oppression ( for ex.: biology/genetics, or the culture of that particular group ).
RestlessMind 9y ago
As an example - illegal immigration and sane solutions to that problem. Liberals will not even allow the word "illegal" in discourse and any solution short of total unconditional amnesty will earn you the label of "bigot".

jbooth 9y ago

There are a tiny minority of liberals who, rather than embracing breaking down barriers and a hunky-dory co-existence like the rest of us, erect barriers of purity and constantly call people out. They're annoying. On the other hand, that's the dominant mode for the entire right half of the spectrum so take their complaints with a grain of salt. And who gives the above-mentioned annoying liberals their biggest platform? Right wing media. Gotta feed the wurlitzer. It's not a "differing and diverse political opinion" to think people of color and women are inherently less worthy, it's just racist/sexist.

sgift 9y ago
> It's not a "differing and diverse political opinion" to think people of color and women are inherently less worthy, it's just racist/sexist. It actually is both, which neatly answers the "why are you against diverse political opinions": Saying something is 'just' an 'opinion' doesn't absolve it from being racist/sexist.
frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
Still no one is willing to name the beliefs that 'you just can't say.' In McCarthyism it was communist/socialist beliefs. What political beliefs can't you espouse in public without being shunned? For Thiel it's probably the pro-authoritarian/pseudo-monarchist beliefs of the neo-reaction guys he runs around with. Gotta be honest, I don't mind those being shunned.
- ViktorV 9y ago
  You just named some of the beliefs that you can't say. Basically you agree with Thiel. One more thing to note: you've called the guy "pro-authoritarian/pseudo-monarchist". Is this how he describes himself ( I guess no )? I grew up in a country with strong far-right culture. Nazis are calling themselves nazis.
  - frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
    Peter Thiel himself doesn't describe himself that way but the people he pays attention to explicitly do. Here: Yarvin told Yiannopoulos that he had been “coaching Thiel.” “Peter needs guidance on politics for sure,” Yiannopoulos responded. “Less than you might think!” Yarvin wrote back. “I watched the election at his house, I think my hangover lasted into Tuesday. He’s fully enlightened, just plays it very carefully.” and then combine that with the fact that Yarvin calls himself a Jacobite and you've got the monarchy/authoritarian connection. The Thiel thing goes a whole lot deeper than Damore or some of the other common examples of "SJW" pushback.
- Taylor_OD 9y ago
  I replied with a few and was downvoted.
AstralStorm 9y ago
Self described liberals. What happened to "live and let live"? At some point using too much violence turns even this into a thinly veiled religion with witch hunts. The cure is measuring impact and the results of interventions accurately.

cm2187 9y ago

I understand the grievance against McCarthyism was mostly about preventing people from getting work if they held the wrong political views. In that respect what Thiel complains about isn't too dissimilar.

malvosenior 9y ago

James Damore was fired from Google for posting his opinion on a private company board that solicited said opinion. I'd say that what he said is pretty taboo in SV.

francisofascii 9y ago
Brenden Eich is a another notable name that comes to mind.
cm2187 9y ago
Particularly given that what the way he expressed his opinion may have been clumsy but it wasn't at all the anti-women manifest that I heard decried in the media.
deong 9y ago
I'm not sure why it seems so revelatory to people that there are some opinions you don't get to express out loud without consequence, even if you're asked about them. If my boss says, "Hey deong, what do you think about black people?", that's not a get-out-of-jail-free card for me to start dropping n-bombs. There's one answer you're allowed to give to that question, and it's not because there's some conspiracy to oppress dissenting opinions. It's because there are extremely reasonable standards for employment that include not shouting racial epithets and white supremacist propaganda. Being asked your opinion doesn't change the rules. Damore was certainly less inflammatory than that, but the point remains. You can argue that his opinions didn't warrant firing, but there's no reasonable way to argue that because he was responding to requests for comment, it's unethical or otherwise shady to hold him accountable for those comments.
- malvosenior 9y ago
  The problem is that on the flip side of the coin what is allowed to be said at Google is much more inflammatory than anything Damore said. It's not even just tolerated but celebrated. You use racism as an example but what Damore said was not racist, he didn't use any epithets, he isn't a white supremacist. It's really odd that you try to lump him in with them.

pj_mukh 9y ago

No one's been able to give me a straight answer to this very simple question (I live in the Bay area).

RestlessMind 9y ago
I just gave an example in a sibling comment (tl;dr: illegal immigration).
- pj_mukh 9y ago
  I personally know 3-4 people who are loudly vocal against illegal immigration working at FANG. I'd like to control it myself. We just differ on strategies on how to do so. As long as you are not yelling at your Hispanic co-workers about building a wall, you'll be fine. Again, this seems to be a made-up narrative.

Taylor_OD 9y ago

I'd imagine being a outspoken Trump supporter would have some fairly serious negative consequences at many companies in the bay. A lot of right wing political opinion would probably be in the same boat. Being pro life or against gay marriage both come to mind as opinions one may have that would immediately change others opinions about them. I'm not defending these opinions rather the belief that just because someone believes something different than me doesn't mean we are destined to vilify each other.

ythn 9y ago

Saying anything politically uncorrect, for one, will draw accusations of bigotry, sexism, racism, and more...

BeetleB 9y ago

I don't live in they Bay area, but from what I keep seeing on HN: A strong hostility to those who say things that support a particular policy that Trump supports. An extreme hostility to those who admit voting for him. I'm pretty sure I have seen comments on HN which pretty strongly hint that the commenters feel Trump supporters should have no place in SV tech companies, because they are, by virtue of supporting him, bigots. These were not greyed out comments, either. Oh, and comments like these: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16384641 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16384641 (Really hard to tell if it is just bait, though).

ViktorV 9y ago

The taboo is that differences between groups of people could be caused by something else than systematic oppression ( for ex.: biology/genetics, or the culture of that particular group ).

RestlessMind 9y ago

As an example - illegal immigration and sane solutions to that problem. Liberals will not even allow the word "illegal" in discourse and any solution short of total unconditional amnesty will earn you the label of "bigot".