3 ms·

I find it bizarre that you basically concede the ground that it is similar to a thought crime and feel no need to defend your stance that his memo should be cla

I find it bizarre that you basically concede the ground that it is similar to a thought crime and feel no need to defend your stance that his memo should be classified as "anti-diversity." Or is saying "you can call it a thought crime if you want" authorizing his use of this language, from a position of moral authority?

tptacek 9y ago
This amorphous right commenters on this thread seem to think Damore had not to be fired, he didn't have. That's what employment at will means. You don't even know whether I think his termination was reasonable. All you know is that I believe --- and so does the NLRB in this instance --- he did not enjoy special protections against unreasonable termination. What I find especially funny about this is that Damore is a conservative, lobbying for more protections for conservatives in the workplace. But employment at will isn't just a conservative value --- it's a signpost conservative value, one of the basic principles on which we organize our market economy. It is, in conservative thought circles, one of the pillars on which American entrepreneurship rests, and a reason that the US excels over Europe in commercial dynamism. Damore is in this instance a conservative the same way the nihilists in The Big Lebowski were nihilistic. But he gave up his toe! He expected a million dollars!
- stcredzero 9y ago
  But employment at will isn't just a conservative value --- it's a signpost conservative value, one of the basic principles on which we organize our market economy. What went on with James Damore has nothing to do with the "good workings" of the employment marketplace. Rather, it's the abuse of at-will employment by groups to push political agendas through coercion. Damore is in this instance a conservative the same way the nihilists in The Big Lebowski were nihilistic. Before the precipitating events, James Damore counted himself a "Classical Liberal." From what I can tell, he may have leaned Libertarian. Honestly, if you were in his shoes, would you think you were treated fairly? I think your answer would be that you wouldn't have been in his shoes. You would have advised James Damore to keep his head down and his mouth shut. The necessity of such a stance is a sign that there's some form of at least mild oppression. Given a chance, would you stick to your nihilist guns and turn down a billion dollars?
  - millstone 9y ago
    Damore was fired only after the memo went public. Afterwards, there was no way that Damore could do his job as a Google software engineer. No team would take him: the optics would be terrible. If you can't do your job, you don't get to keep it.
  - pvg 9y ago
    Rather, it's the abuse of at-will employment by groups to push political agendas through coercion. [...] a sign that there's some form of at least mild oppression. Never mind funny movie nihilism, a few more iterations in this thread and you'll type yourself into espousing what are starting to sound like some of the core tenets of Marxism. And they say internet forum discussions never changed anyone's position!
- pokemongoaway 9y ago
  I'm not conceding to be on your "amorphous right," but the amorphous left seems to put words in everyone's mouth. I haven't seen anyone in this thread say that they are certain that Google broke the law in this case - since they are a private organization. What I have seen a lot of is people reframing and mischaracterizing the memo as "anti-diversity," "sexual harassment," "pseudoscience," etc. I don't need to know if you think his termination was reasonable because I'm not arguing that you were. However, you were arguing that he was cloaking hate speech as science - as you stated, "...were discriminatory and constituted sexual harassment, notwithstanding his effort to cloak his comments with “scientific” references..." This part is very worthy of debate!
  - stevenh 9y ago
    He was referring to Damore's supposed right not to be fired as "amorphous".
    - pokemongoaway 9y ago
      Thanks - it seems so, but the rest of my comment still applies. Correction noted.

tptacek 9y ago

This amorphous right commenters on this thread seem to think Damore had not to be fired, he didn't have. That's what employment at will means. You don't even know whether I think his termination was reasonable. All you know is that I believe --- and so does the NLRB in this instance --- he did not enjoy special protections against unreasonable termination. What I find especially funny about this is that Damore is a conservative, lobbying for more protections for conservatives in the workplace. But employment at will isn't just a conservative value --- it's a signpost conservative value, one of the basic principles on which we organize our market economy. It is, in conservative thought circles, one of the pillars on which American entrepreneurship rests, and a reason that the US excels over Europe in commercial dynamism. Damore is in this instance a conservative the same way the nihilists in The Big Lebowski were nihilistic. But he gave up his toe! He expected a million dollars!

stcredzero 9y ago
But employment at will isn't just a conservative value --- it's a signpost conservative value, one of the basic principles on which we organize our market economy. What went on with James Damore has nothing to do with the "good workings" of the employment marketplace. Rather, it's the abuse of at-will employment by groups to push political agendas through coercion. Damore is in this instance a conservative the same way the nihilists in The Big Lebowski were nihilistic. Before the precipitating events, James Damore counted himself a "Classical Liberal." From what I can tell, he may have leaned Libertarian. Honestly, if you were in his shoes, would you think you were treated fairly? I think your answer would be that you wouldn't have been in his shoes. You would have advised James Damore to keep his head down and his mouth shut. The necessity of such a stance is a sign that there's some form of at least mild oppression. Given a chance, would you stick to your nihilist guns and turn down a billion dollars?
- millstone 9y ago
  Damore was fired only after the memo went public. Afterwards, there was no way that Damore could do his job as a Google software engineer. No team would take him: the optics would be terrible. If you can't do your job, you don't get to keep it.
- pvg 9y ago
  Rather, it's the abuse of at-will employment by groups to push political agendas through coercion. [...] a sign that there's some form of at least mild oppression. Never mind funny movie nihilism, a few more iterations in this thread and you'll type yourself into espousing what are starting to sound like some of the core tenets of Marxism. And they say internet forum discussions never changed anyone's position!
pokemongoaway 9y ago
I'm not conceding to be on your "amorphous right," but the amorphous left seems to put words in everyone's mouth. I haven't seen anyone in this thread say that they are certain that Google broke the law in this case - since they are a private organization. What I have seen a lot of is people reframing and mischaracterizing the memo as "anti-diversity," "sexual harassment," "pseudoscience," etc. I don't need to know if you think his termination was reasonable because I'm not arguing that you were. However, you were arguing that he was cloaking hate speech as science - as you stated, "...were discriminatory and constituted sexual harassment, notwithstanding his effort to cloak his comments with “scientific” references..." This part is very worthy of debate!
- stevenh 9y ago
  He was referring to Damore's supposed right not to be fired as "amorphous".
  - pokemongoaway 9y ago
    Thanks - it seems so, but the rest of my comment still applies. Correction noted.