28 ms·

I don't get it. I grew up in Silicon Valley and I work in tech, and so do many other people I know. They run the gamut from far-left socialists to libertarians

I don't get it. I grew up in Silicon Valley and I work in tech, and so do many other people I know. They run the gamut from far-left socialists to libertarians to own a bunch of guns. They have all kinds of ethnic backgrounds and religious views. Some of my most libertarian/pro-gun friends have not been shy about their political views and it hasn't hurt their tech careers at all. They are far more welcome here than liberals are in other parts of the country. It seems to me, from personal experience, that the people who feel alienated are the ones who bring politics to work in an overbearing contrarian way, seeking to cause offense under the guise of "debate," and then pretend to be shocked when people don't want to put up with their shit. Work is for working; it's not a debating society, and especially not when the debating is done in bad faith. Peter Thiel has been more politically vocal than most, and he is vocal about things he knows to be unpopular. He can't be surprised that people who disagree with him are also vocal. If he can't take the heat he should stay out of the kitchen.

tomsthumb 9y ago
On the other hand, I have seen a coworker strongly imply that someone is a white nationalist for suggesting that it’s possible to be a non-racist republican.
- cagenut 9y ago
  it is not
- enraged_camel 9y ago
  One can be a non-racist conservative, in the sense of wanting a smaller government and less regulation. However, today’s Republican Party is undeniably racist, and supporting them also makes one racist in my opinion. This is especially true since today’s Republican Party is not actually conservative. One cannot want smaller government while simultaneously supporting a drastic increase in immigration and border security and a whopping $25 billion for a 2000-mile long wall.
  - Pxtl 9y ago
    You don't have to be racist to support the modern Republicans, but you do have to decide that racism really isn't a deal-breaker for you.
    - s2g 9y ago
      Which is pretty much the same thing.
    - Daishiman 9y ago
      If racism isn't a deal-breaker for you...
      - berberous 9y ago
        In a multi-party system, I would agree with your implication. But when you have a system with only two realistic choices, it is possible to vote for a candidate because you think the other one is even worse, without endorsing the candidate you voted for.
  - fouric 9y ago
    "undeniably racist"? I'm curious. Do tell more.
  - samiru 9y ago
    And you sound like a populist. How one can have a meaningful debate when nothing you say is strictly true?
  - dang 9y ago
    Please keep standard political talking points off HN. If you repeat something stock, it will get stock responses. That makes it off-topic on a site dedicated to curiosity. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - tessierashpool 9y ago
- cgag 9y ago
  Lmao at people acting like people are insane for feeling right wing people are alienated and there being not one but two comments in this thread saying being a republican makes you a racist.
  - sho 9y ago
    You really "LMAO"? Because you should be "fearing your ass off" when people are afraid to express their legitimate political views. This has all happened before and it wasn't pretty. update: come on downvoters. At least give me a clue.
    - cgag 9y ago
      It's funny in the fact that it's so obviously absurd but the people doing it don't see it. It's both funny and scary depending on how much I think about it.
- greglindahl 9y ago
  Thanks for the anecdote. Was a reminder of "let's be respectful, now!" good enough to solve the problem?
  - ameister14 9y ago
    nice, pointing out that he used an anecdote to respond to a person also basing their opinion on anecdotes
    - greglindahl 9y ago
      Oh, I'm fine with anecdotes responding to anecdotes. I was just wondering what happened next.
  - tomsthumb 9y ago
    It took many more words, several days and a lot of listening from both sides for a more reasonable position to emerge.
- crdoconnor 9y ago
  I noticed a similar view appearing more than once in the UK: "if you voted for Brexit you're probably a racist". I think people like this were ironically and unwittingly recruiting people to the other side. Which is unfortunate.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    Had a friend who mused (not sure if serious, but tone somewhat suggested it) that'd he'd travel in such a way to "avoid the racist counties" (i.e. majority brexit)...
  - abusoufiyan 9y ago
    >I think people like this were ironically and unwittingly recruiting people to the other side. Which is unfortunate. If you're dumb enough to switch how you vote on something that is unquestionably going to change your personal economic, social, and political future because someone went a little overboard in calling people racists, then you deserve to have your country decline.
cowmix 9y ago
If these people want to know what it is like to be "stifled" in the workplace, be an atheist or lefty in Texas.
- jfaucett 9y ago
  Really? (warning anecdotes :), When I lived in the south east (Alabama / Georgia), I didn't notice any stifling because I was an atheist. Sure, you had to deal with people's super religious fundamentalist beliefs which got expressed all the time, but my barrage of dissenting opinions didn't get any backlash, except for the "prayer for my lost soul" which did happen on occasion.
  - zebnyc 9y ago
    To add my 2 cents, I was employed in Macon, Georgia by a small software firm around the time the Bush administrating was drumming up support to attack Iraq. I was opposed to it and let my feelings be known amongst my colleagues. My colleagues would agree with my POV, go home and then come back the next day and attack me. The cycle repeated itself a few times before I realized they were going home to Fox News everyday. Unfortunately for me, I discussed these opinions in the cafetaria. When they downsized a short while later, I was the first one to be let go. Since then I never discuss politics at work, even with folks I trust,
- tc313 9y ago
  Do you live/work in Texas? The big cities (Austin, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio) are overwhelmingly liberal.
  - brandonmenc 9y ago
    They are also full of people who fled small Texas towns to get away from stifling religious upbringings.
- filesystem 9y ago
  I'm interested in hearing more about this. Is it common for religion to be discussed in the workplace in Texas?
idlewords 9y ago
Thiel spoke on national television at the National Republican Convention. He made the choice to bring his private political beliefs into the public sphere, and has no grounds to complain for catching heat for them.
- jnbiche 9y ago
  This has been downvoted, but this is an important distinction that our legal system even recognizes. There's a qualitative difference between a "public person" (like Thiel) and a "private person" like some random co-worker who doesn't tour around doing speeches and writing opinion pieces.
  - idlewords 9y ago
    Agreed. Moreover, speaking at a nationally-televised political convention is an inherently public, political act.
- sturgill 9y ago
  And when did Brendan Eich make public comments? When he privately donated to a cause? You can be dismissed from leading a company today by privately supporting conservative causes. And there’s very little threat of a liberal CEO being dismissed independent of his private/public statements. I have no desire to speak to any particular political subject in this forum; but it’s incredibly disingenuous to pretend this only happens to people who take public conservative positions. Though even the charitable reading of your statement suggests that you believe that conservatives should stay in the closest. Which is a fascinating turn to say the least... And, as a religious conservative guy in tech I’ll add my point of view: it’s okay to talk politics at work as long as you agree with everyone else. Those of us with dissenting world paradigms spend most of the day quietly wishing these conversations would end. Because there isn’t debate to be had at work; dissenting views are not welcome.
  - idlewords 9y ago
    I am speaking specifically about Peter Thiel. You and I probably agree about Brendan Eich. I also agree that tech companies can be a difficult place for constructive political debate (or even agree-to-disagree conversations), and I do not think this is a good thing.
downandout 9y ago
If he can't take the heat he should stay out of the kitchen. I think that's the whole point though. The article is saying that there is too much heat simply because they express their opposing viewpoints. "Stay out of the kitchen" means "close your mouth around Silicon Valley liberals" or you'll experience backlash. While this may not be your personal experience, the article essentially says that the somewhat ironic message coming out of the Valley from people in the "party of tolerance" is that they tolerate everyone except those that have opposing viewpoints.
- twblalock 9y ago
  > "Stay out of the kitchen" means "close your mouth around Silicon Valley liberals" or you'll experience backlash. No, it means don't expect to be able to say controversial stuff without people who disagree with you also having their say.
  - downandout 9y ago
    The problem is that among this crowd, simply saying "I voted for Trump" or "I hated Hillary so I just didn't vote" is considered "controversial" and worthy of personal and professional backlash.
    - webkike 9y ago
      Voting for an openly sexist person is extremely controversial. I don't find "I hated Hillary so I just didn't vote" controversial at all.
      - downandout 9y ago
        Your comment is a perfect example of the Valley's intense hatred of any remotely conservative viewpoint that the article is referring to. People have all kinds of reasons for voting for a particular candidate. It doesn't mean they endorse all of their actions or views. In this last election, I suspect that many Trump votes were made simply because they didn't like Hillary, and there were only two choices.
sebleon 9y ago
> If he can't take the heat he should stay out of the kitchen Exactly, that's why he moved away.
- vr46 9y ago
  Lol. Also, isn’t he leaving to find his own echo chamber?
  - tessierashpool 9y ago
    He wanted a safe space.
- twblalock 9y ago
  He will find out soon enough that people don't like him no matter how far away from them he lives.
unapprovedviews 9y ago
> libertarian/pro-gun friends have not been shy about their political views and it hasn't hurt their tech careers at all It's interesting that you specifically choose "libertarian". While maybe technically further to the right than Republican it truly seems supporting specifically Republican candidates is wholly furiously unacceptable in the bay area -- especially at tech companies. Try wearing a pin, t-shirt, hat, etc... "openly" supporting Trump to a tech company in the city -- actually for the safety of your career and physical self better not.
- twblalock 9y ago
  I know "normal" Republicans as well. I was using libertarianism as an example of an extreme on the political spectrum, as I used socialism as the opposite extreme. At my last job, several employees openly supported Trump, and they didn't suffer any consequences.
  - djrogers 9y ago
    Libertarian views are far less extreme in many ways than modern Republican views, and often align rather closely with progressive/democrat views. In fact, the libertarian ethos evolved from classic liberalism, including support of LGBT issues, racial and gender equality, and a largely non-interventionist global view.
    - ianai 9y ago
      Tell that to the libertarians of Las Vegas.
    - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
      Republican-voting libertarians are in some ways worse than normal Republicans. Unlike normal Republicans who simply don't believe that their policies are violating people's rights, Republican-voting libertarians freely admit that the policies they are supporting (their stated position is against the policies, but they still support them with their votes) violate people's right, but they go along with them so that they can get a tax break.
strangeloops85 9y ago
Yeah I don't get it either, especially the "feeling alienated" part. Does that include being feted and having a respectful discussion with your liberal friend and old colleague, Reid Hoffman, on the Stanford campus on Jan. 31 of this year, moderated by a very sympathetic Niall Ferguson? With laudatory words and praise from the President and Provost? https://news.stanford.edu/2018/02/01/cardinal-conversation-reid-hoffman-peter-thiel-technology-politics/ https://news.stanford.edu/2018/02/01/cardinal-conversation-r... Look, if you're going to speak at the RNC and actively support Trump, you will be on the opposite side of a super-majority of college-educated people in this country at this point. And definitely a large super-majority of people under 35, women, Asian Americans, Latinos and African Americans. So if you're surrounded by such people, and are loudly promoting such views, don't expect your interlocutors to not criticize them, or necessarily want to hear them ad nauseum. The evidence however suggests that Mr. Thiel is certainly being given PLENTY of platforms to continue expressing his viewpoints in a respectful manner in front of influential crowds of people, including students. Who is pushing this whole narrative?
- manfredo 9y ago
  This article isn't just about Peter Thiel, it's about tech workers in general. Not everyone has the luxury of being a billionaire, and knowing that they live comfortably for the rest of their lives even if they become unemployable. The sentiments expressed by quotes in this article: > People in Silicon Valley “openly lie to one another out of fear of losing their jobs or being publicly crucified..." > Sometimes Silicon Valley venture-capital investors and startup founders “have a certain way of thinking, and if you don’t fit into that way of thinking you’re not in the cool club” are things that I can absolutely identify with. And I consider myself a moderate liberal, I can only imagine what mainstream conservatives are thinking.
  - BadassFractal 9y ago
    Same, as another founder. And same, I would consider myself pretty liberal. Pro choice, anti military-industrial complex, anti prison complex, pro legalization, sex positive, pro gay marriage, pro universal healthcare, against church and state coupling, non-climate change denier, pro science, yada yada, you name it. Admittedly, I don't even like the term "conservative", like Naval would say, pinning labels onto yourself only forces you into static positions that you end up having to defend, even if you don't 100% buy into them. I simply happen to have certain stances and ideas that are in opposition to the mainstream thought of SV. As much as I'd love to discuss them, potentially learning more about them myself and (gasp!) even changing my mind in the process, I'm not comfortable doing it. There's a high chance I will be immediately labeled as "racist / sexist / bigot / white supremacist / [fill in the blank]" for even contemplating disagreement on these topics (let's take "diversity" or how we're handling it as a society as an example) without any supporting evidence. Unfortunately, as of today, bigoteering has 0% burden on the person making the accusation and 100% of the weight put on the accused. It's always safe to call someone a witch, but proving them wrong in one's defense is nigh impossible. Ironically, the most open minded and considerate conversations about diversity that I've ever had were with black coworkers. I've learned plenty from them, changed my stance several times, realized I didn't know that much before. The worst were almost always with overrepresented majorities who were "stepping in to speak up for their less-advantaged brethren". I've never learned anything from them on the topics they were so zealous about. It's the diversity version of "white knighting". It's hard not to become jaded and assume that most people in this latter category don't actually care, and just want to establish themselves at the top of the moral hierarchy through vacuous virtue signaling. It's disappointing.
manfredo 9y ago
I work in the Bay Area and I have personally worked with (as in, on the same team with and working directly in cooperation. CEOs, founders, etc. are not included in this count), exactly one person who discussed their conservative views. This is in comparison to hundreds of liberals. Sure, you may be able to identify at least one person on variety of ends of the political spectrum, but I don't think anyone can sanely deny a vast under representation of conservatives in Silicon Valley. Granted, Silicon Valley itself is politically imbalanced. But even in San Francisco 9% [1] of voters voted Republican in 2016.Despite that, I haven't witnessed anything close to that share of conservatives in my tech jobs - even in my jobs lower in the Peninsula and in South Bay. Adding this as an edit: Also, do you work in the Bay Area currently (you mentioned you grew up there)? There is a pretty substantial discrepancy between voicing political views in high school and college vs. when people actually start working. I have met more than an order of magnitude more conservatives and non-liberals in 4 years of university in the Bay Area as compared working in tech there - 25 to 30 in unviersity vs. exactly 1 in industry. Also edited in the fact that I work in the Bay Area in the first sentence, so I realized I didn't mention it until the last.
- birken 9y ago
  Just to counter this anecdata, the startup I used to work at was founded by 4 conservatives, 2 of whom met working in the George W Bush White House. We used to discuss and debate all sorts of politic topics, and in fact I was quite often in the minority (a position that didn't bother me... it was a good way to learn different perspective on some key issues). They were then and I'm sure still now are quite openly conservative and happy to debate politics (in appropriate settings). They didn't hide it publicly either, for example in the early days of the 2016 presidential election they had Jeb Bush come over and give a talk. Jeb was made fun of quite a bit for the manner in which he put on the company swag [1]. The company has raised hundreds of millions of dollars and has hundreds of employees. In my experience I didn't notice a single situation in which their conservative views had negative impacts on the company. In fact I think their conservative background helped the company raise money from VCs, who I'd wager are more conservative than average. 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBg6hU5zXDA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBg6hU5zXDA
merpnderp 9y ago
I’ve had a colleague straight up say everyone who isn’t standing up to Trump or agrees with any of his policies is a Nazi apologist.
- andybak 9y ago
  There might be element of "strategic manoeuvring" here. Some people stake a position further out than their genuine views because they are trying to influence people's behaviour. I find myself doing it occasionally albeit not consciously. It's essentially related to the negotiation strategy of starting with a low offer so you've got room to move towards your real price. Related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
  - filesystem 9y ago
    Forgive me, but I don't think that your comparison holds any water. I don't think anyone would begin a salary negotiation by comparing their co-workers to a group that committed the most horrific genocide in human history. It's simply a cheap tactic that is used in an attempt to de-legitimize opposing viewpoints and end conversations.
- tessierashpool 9y ago
  But this is probably true. Trump is very very different from a mainstream Republican. In 2016, mainstream Republicans were all calling him an insane criminal. Today, psychologists are endorsing the "insane" part, his long record of legal problems arguably endorses the "criminal" part, and the Mueller investigation looks extremely likely to endorse the "criminal" part as well. Trump's father was arrested at a KKK rally. Trump brought fringe white supremacists into the White House, and the only serious mainstream politician he brought into the White House was named after multiple Civil War generals who all fought for the Confederacy. After Charlottesville, Trump defended the white supremacists who marched. I think you could argue that failing to stand up to Trump only makes you an apologist for a Nazi apologist. Beyond that, though, your co-worker is basically just objectively correct. Many mainstream Republicans have voiced the same opinion, although many of them recanted once he took office. (And many of them continued voicing this opinion regardless.)
T2_t2 9y ago
Isn't the rebuttal your post the heart of the whole current, I'm not even sure how to describe it, "listen" movement: your experience won't be the same as anyone else's? I wonder why that doesn't extend to a white, male, gay, conservative? I also think it is odd that we can see the flaws in everyone everywhere else, but the flaws in our own environ seem so hard to spot. I'm reminded of this in these times: http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html > Diff present ideas against those of various past cultures, and see what you get. Some will be shocking by present standards. Ok, fine; but which might also be true?
- twblalock 9y ago
  Thiel has a larger platform for his views than most people, and his success in Silicon Valley is ironically the reason he gets such a platform. He gets blowback because people are listening, and don't like what he says. Everyone's right to free speech is maximized when he says what he thinks and people who disagree with him say what they think.
  - manfredo 9y ago
    This article isn't mainly about Thiel. He's in the rare position in that he knows he can live comfortably for the rest of his life even if his employment opportunities are reduced to zero. This article is more about overall atmosphere and culture experienced by standard tech workers. The full excerpt from Tim Ferris (part of which OP's article quoted) really captures this: > Now, more and more, I feel like it's a Russian nesting doll of facades -- Washington DC with fewer neck ties, where people openly lie to one another out of fear of losing their jobs or being publicly crucified. It's weird, unsettling, and, frankly, really dangerous. There's way too much power here for politeness to be sustainable. If no one feels they can say "Hey, I know it makes everyone uncomfortable, but I think there's a leak in the fuel rods in this nuclear submarine..." we're headed for big trouble. I can definitely identify with this sentiment.
- anigbrowl 9y ago
  I wonder why that doesn't extend to a white, male, gay, conservative? Thiel has been around for a long time and his views have been given extensive consideration - I'd say he's a well known public figure out here on the west coast. It seems to me that people have listened to him and that a significant fraction have subsequently arrived at a negative conclusion about him.
cgag 9y ago
The people I'm honest with about my politics are people I've sort of slowly sussed out as cool, we're all pretty afraid to state many of our actual opinions because we're not rich. I don't care very much but there are a ton of people out there afraid of being damore'd.
- mrep 9y ago
  > I don't care very much but there are a ton of people out there afraid of being damore'd. Seriously, here is how it went down from what I remember: Damore writes controversial internal only paper -> another googler takes the document meant for internal only viewing and shares it with the media -> someone removes most/all graphs and citations to make it look more like an opinion piece (most likely to flame up more media attention) -> journalist posts internal document without permission from company. That is at least 2 people going out of there way (in a most likely illegal way too) essentially trying to start a witch hunt on this guy and ruin his life for writing 1 paper just because they do not agree with him.
  - throwaway1748 9y ago
    The real problem is how much of a win that tactic was for Gizmodo and others who published the incomplete document in bad faith. Clickbait sensationalism in media, particularly around race and gender issues, created this environment.
    - Chris2048 9y ago
      And Gizmodo is the new incarnation of Gawker, sued for obnoxious journalism in the first place..
- abusoufiyan 9y ago
  Just want to point out that this is life in America for most minorities / women. We all have conversations amongst each other we would never have in front of others precisely because we know that our white / male bosses will take it poorly and treat us differently if they hear it.
dcow 9y ago
From my perspective, it's the culture that develops around the "liberal politics" that is the issue. I don't think anyone is complaining about "getting heat for political views". I mean that's just politics. What I've experienced at various companies, though, is that the culture becomes infected with the politics to a point where it impacts the way companies operate and even individual employees' ability to perform their job at a capacity that can produce value. This is where I think it crosses the line. Effectively, companies or individuals end up handicapped by the political agenda. And that makes zero sense rationally for the business. It's literally not their business to be in politics. I'm hesitant to share anecdotes so I'll keep them fuzzy, but a few things I've seen are along the lines of places removing a comedic joke item because it /might/ give a newcomer the impression that the place "normalizes fascism" (rationale was fear someone wouldn't understand it's a joke and thus let's err on the side of keeping the space sterile), and hiring/comp policies designed around explicitly not paying men more than woman for the same role (everyone's the same role when your company doesn't have roles...) regardless of experience, performance, market, etc. at the expense of acquiring or retaining outstanding talent. And look what happened at Google... It all comes from good intentions, but IMO it really just misses the mark and reduces an otherwise complex and human landscape to arbitrary statistics and n=1 anecdotes. There is very little intellectual rigor, or proven methodology and a lot of pandering to the political atmosphere (and this happens at places juggling millions of dollars of investor capital). On top of that, I don't understand why the office needs to be the place to explore these issues. If there are objectively systemic issues and discrepancies between e.g. genders in the US today that need correction, then we need to solve those with government policy and social activism. And if our society and our system of government does not respond, perhaps you just have to grow up realize that despite your self-endowed intellectual infallibility, some other people disagree and you might be barking up the wrong tree. Or, don't concede and keep fighting for justice, but don't bring it to work because you're too impatient or lack the perseverance to see your issue through at local, state, and national levels. So even if other areas might have (for the sake of the argument), on average, more jerks that just don't get it or have a few things to learn about being inclusive and respectful in the way they conduct their daily lives, people don't build operational business policies around solving the perceived problems or shortcomings (not saying HR departments can't lay ground rules, but I'm talking about operational strategies). And that's the difference between an office in SF and an office in NYC or Boston, or Austin, etc. I would not be surprised if the fact that people find some of Thiel's politics to be unfavorable is impacting his ability to function professionally in the Bay Area. When people's professional livelihood is at steak, of course they will gravitate towards communities where they are not otherwise encumbered. In the case of Thiel, money seems less of an issue, so I suspect he's also making a social statement about the state of affairs down by the bay. Celebrate or listen, but I hope you choose to listen because talent and money are all SV has got going for it, and if those things leave you can kiss the glory days goodbye. /2cents
strangeloops85 9y ago
Also! As Kim-Mai Cutler pointed out on Twitter, Silicon Valley's positions are not new!: "Andy Grove gave to reproductive rights, Gordon Moore to conservation, HP was one of the very first employers to offer healthcare coverage, to hire Asian & African Americans like Art Fong & Roy Clay." Silicon Valley has always been different from the rest of the U.S. The "H.P. way" was in its time a radical and progressive thing.
guelo 9y ago
Conservative propaganda has learned from the left how powerful victimology, feeling persecuted, is. White resentment is through the roof when I talk politics with a lot of my white friends.
- mrtesthah 9y ago
  White resentment becomes possible only when one ceases to care about facts. (Ex. http://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/rm/reports/cerd.pdf http://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/rm/reports/cerd.pdf)
  - WaxProlix 9y ago
    This is part of what makes it so pernicious - they feel persecuted, but everyone else can see that they're firmly in control of everything. So it gets pointed out that they're not actually persecuted, which makes the White Moderate feel more persecuted and ignored, pushing them further right. Frustrating, but I don't know what you can do about it.
    - andybak 9y ago
      "They" is a very dangerous word in this concept because despite the genuine advantages of being white - there are many white people who are powerless and have had shitty lives. Inter-group vs intra-group differences. Someone from a minority might well have had an better life with more opportunities than someone from a privileged class. Comparing groups does not translate into comparing individuals (interestingly this is the same intellectual shortcut that leads to racism)
      - WaxProlix 9y ago
        > genuine advantages of being white The folks I'm mostly talking about don't actually believe in that, so obviously my "they" was too broad, indeed. > Someone from a minority might well have had an better life with more opportunities than someone from a privileged class. I don't think this has anything to do with what I'm talking about, except maybe as an intentional deflection? We're talking about white resentment as a phenomenon, not Bill the blue collar veteran who was tricked into plundering loot for Halliburton in 2004 or something. > Comparing groups does not translate into comparing individuals (interestingly this is the same intellectual shortcut that leads to racism) Discussing race as a phenomenon doesn't make you racist, and this talking point is often used by alt-righters to make some sort of "actually, anti-racists are the REAL racists" narrative. I don't buy it. edit: My views are failing in the marketplace of ideas! Feel free to leave a comment if you want to engage.
newnewpdro 9y ago
> Work is for working; it's not a debating society, and especially not when the debating is done in bad faith. If this were actually true of the current milieu of tech employment in the bay area, I'd likely still be a willing and active participant in that workforce. Substantial energy is wasted discussing ideologies and arranging/having meetings on what are fundamentally social issues we're not realistically fixing in the short-term at the workplace from the bottom-up. The reasons appeared largely focused on satisfying the expectations of a vocal minority of SJW-types bringing this crap into the workplace with HR departments jumping at the opportunity to appear busy and influential. Edit: Maybe my experiences were unique, though my social circles were complaining of similar things at their respective startups.
- spookthesunset 9y ago
  > SJW Ah the SJW boogyman. A quick way to get anybody with a functioning brain to dismiss everything you say.
  - lkerrekfjk 9y ago
    > Ah the SJW boogyman. A quick way to get anybody with a functioning brain to dismiss everything you say. lol, this stuff is real: > Concerning White Fragility > All white people are racist and, far from absolving them, this places an urgent burden on each and all. https://np.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/7asxk7/concerning_white_fragility/ https://np.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/7asxk7/concernin... You can dismiss the problem all you want and act like these crazies don't exist, but they do and they are actively trying to kick out anybody that doesn't fall in line with their ideology from different circles where they operate.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    It's just the counterpart of the "racist" boogyman. Why is it terrible to dismiss people by calling them SJWs, but not calling them racist.
    - abusoufiyan 9y ago
leshow 9y ago
> Work is for working; it's not a debating society, and especially not when the debating is done in bad faith. If this were true the far left wouldn't be able to discuss social issues at work either, but they are.
noty 9y ago
I think, contrary to what many people are saying, that what has really happened is that it has never been easier to hold an opinion about almost anything. Previously you had to at least partly subscribe to some sort of ideology that was somewhat reasoned. Which meant that you were prepared when you met someone who didn't agree with because most ideologies reason around the same things. Today there are so many source of information that you are never really forced to dive deeper into something. If you see something repeated enough you get a very strong sense of it being true. Many fringe opinions spread without people realizing that they are just that. They aren't used to people disagreeing with them so when people do so strongly they feel alienated. In regards to Thiel moving, and other VCs praising China, I think that has more to do with people in general becoming more skeptical about SV. Which is a bad thing if you are a VC and are selling "disruption", but probably a good thing for engineers.
shard972 9y ago
I notice you didn't include Alt-right in there which at the moment seem to be political ideology on a big rise and in my personal opinion, I think it's generally less radical than communism. Consider though that one thing the alt-right will never accept is that racial diversity in the workplace is a net positive in itself. Whether it's true or false, it's just apart of the parcel. Now how would someone like that feel comfortable in a workplace that tells you that being against racial diversity is racist? You don't even have to bring up your opinions, it's beamed to you on a regular basis through meetings, announcements and slack conversations. I personally had a similar experience recently at my job in Australia in relation to the vote on gay marriage. Even though I am myself gay and have a boyfriend, I was in favour of a plebiscite. This was in complete opposition to rest of the company, who went so far as to joint write a letter with other companies demanding the government not allow a plebiscite and to instead just pass gay marriage without a public vote. There was alot of implication around that anyone who disagreed wanted the vote for a chance to vote no and more importantly, to allow for an advertising campaign against gays to intimidate the community as a whole. People made the claim around myself that obvious the reason people want the plebecide is because they are homophobic racist rednecks. I don't know maybe i'm just rambling at this point but It's just not nice to work in an environment where you have to listen to people trash your character based on your beliefs and you can't say anything otherwise your "discussing politics" and "rocking the boat".
- andybak 9y ago
  > being against racial diversity is racist That made me stop and think. I'm trying to imagine a picture of someone who is against racial diversity but isn't remotely racist and whilst I agree there's no logical contradiction inherent in that position I do struggle to think of a realistic portrait of such an individual. I might be missing something here but can you spell out this position for me in a bit more detail? I'm genuinely interested as I wonder if my definition of "racist" or my definition of "against racial diversity" might be different to yours.
  - shard972 9y ago
    Consider that this is the majority consensus in Japan and China. Imagine going to japan and saying "guys, this workplace is far too asian, what we really need here is some more indians, africans and arabs to get this workplace into the 21st century". I think most people here could see that not going over well. Would we then think of china and japan as mostly racist? I don't really want to get into racist/racial debate on HN, other than to say it's not some tiny opinion only held by white supremacists and neo-nazis. That and you will find if you look into the research on race differences (eg: genetic influences on IQ) that these topics are not even close to be declared settled and are still hotly contested.
lagadu 9y ago
> Work is for working; it's not a debating society, and especially not when the debating is done in bad faith. Maybe I'm biased because not being in the US most of my knowledge about it is from HN links and discussions along with a few other blog posts here and there but: if that were true, we wouldn't be seeing "but mah inclusion!" posts and discussions on/about American startups every single day around here.
4bpp 9y ago
> It seems to me, from personal experience, that the people who feel alienated are the ones who bring politics to work in an overbearing contrarian way, seeking to cause offense under the guise of "debate," and then pretend to be shocked when people don't want to put up with their shit. Like many other commenters in this thread, you choose a wording that would be more appropriate if the extent of the problem were obnoxious Republicans not getting invited to happy hour/their coworkers' birthday party/?. The type of situation that people complain about, whether it is accurate or not, seems to be more along the lines that if you are in the wrong half of Silicon Valley companies, being recognised as deviating from the obnoxious Democrat position on any issue of import may result in your colleagues organising to report you to HR and/or rile up a small city's worth of Twitter users to call for your company to terminate you or be boycotted itself, not to mention potential long-term consequences along the lines of easily googleable Medium articles with your name on them or entries in an unknown number of blacklists circulated to recruiters through activist backchannels. How accurate or common any of these are is completely up to discussion, but dismissing them as if any of what is alleged amounts to a normal and healthy free speech reaction just seems disingenuous.
oh_sigh 9y ago
My observation at a big-4 SV tech company is that people constantly bring up anti-Trump and basically anti-conservative viewpoints, but very rarely do conservatives bring up anti-liberal viewpoints. Thankfully, most people there don't talk about politics. Maybe 5% of the population are constantly bringing it up though, rarely in direct work functions, but in any other message board or forum.
gameswithgo 9y ago
>Peter Thiel has been more politically vocal than most, and he is vocal about things he knows to be unpopular. He can't be surprised that people who disagree with him are also vocal. If he can't take the heat he should stay out of the kitchen. He has to put up with people thinking he is an asshole. We the proletariat have to put up with the people he can buy into power, which affects our livelihood, health, the future of our society. If I had the money to sue him out of existence, as he is wont to do to others, I would. Fuck him.
altoz 9y ago
Not surprising: Nearly everyone from Silicon Valley that's progressive/liberal thinks there's no problem or that the problem is something else. Nearly everyone not fitting the description above thinks there's a problem and that it alienates them.
tessierashpool 9y ago
the conservative claim to being "silenced" is a reflection of privilege. for instance, the icon here is Peter Thiel, a billionaire who complains about being victimized because people tell him he's in the wrong. you will and should face ostracism and other consequences for saying, believing, and doing things that people find abhorrent or evil. free speech means you're free to believe those things, and everybody else is free to call you evil, and coordinate accordingly. conservatism in the United States has enabled the murder of countless children, both through the NRA's fanaticism re assault weapons, and through the weird effective impunity police have re criminal prosecution, even after killing children. conservatism in the US has enabled the destruction of the environment. the Trump campaign and presidency have seen a rapid escalation of hate crimes, and after Charlottesville the president explicitly defended the white supremacists in attendance. there is so much blood on the hands of the conservative movement. so much racism. so much sexism. so much fear-mongering and rabble-rousing. how could you possibly expect to do that kind of thing without facing CRITICISM? how could you possibly be the victims here?
- dreit1 9y ago
  This is the exact type of commentary the article is talking. This conservative strawman you’ve built is far from average. In this absurd, inflammatory commentary replace the conservative boogeyman with a Muslim boogeyman or a gay boogeyman and realize you’re using the exact same type of rhetoric as the people you despise
  - tessierashpool 9y ago
    is it absurd to claim that the NRA's refusal to compromise re assault weapons has led to the death of many kids in American schools? what is the absurd part here? how many kids can a gay person be alleged to have killed just by being gay? there is no conservative boogeyman in my post. I am referring to the practical effects of policy decisions.
    - Rebelgecko 9y ago
      > is it absurd to claim that the NRA's refusal to compromise re assault weapons has led to the death of many kids in American schools? Honestly I think it is, although if I were having a discussion with a coworker I would couch it in slightly different terms, because many of my coworkers aren't very familiar with guns. e.g. defining assault weapons (varies depending on locale), asking why they are concerned about this like bayonet lugs, are they aware of anyone who has been killed by a bayonet charge in the US since the Civil War, what's wrong with barrel shrouds, etc
burnte 9y ago
Thiel's real problem is that he doesn't have "conservative" views as much as he has totalitarian and abusive views. He feels might makes right, and that wealth makes might. He's in a group that feel they should be free from restrictions of normal people, and that corporate oligarchy is fine as long as they're on top. He's openly elitist, and THAT is something SV doesn't look nicely upon.
scarface74 9y ago
It's not liberterianism or even standard Republicanism that seems to be an anathema to the tech crowd. It's populism and religious conservatism. But sense I'm neither populist or a religious conservative, I'm just as much in the bubble as anyone.
- nasredin 9y ago
  Exactly! Your coworkers just want you to leave your religion and xenophobia and or mild racism at home.
  - scarface74 9y ago
    Why should anyone at work know my religious or political views? My views are mostly in line with the tech crowd - except I found I’m far more weary of government intervention into tech than many on HN. But I steer clear of political discussions at work.
lkerrekfjk 9y ago
> Some of my most libertarian/pro-gun friends have not been shy about their political views and it hasn't hurt their tech careers at all. They are far more welcome here than liberals are in other parts of the country. Do your friends work at Twitter? Github? Google? obviously they don't or they would have gotten fired for their political views by now.
_pmf_ 9y ago
> Work is for working; it's not a debating society Why does Google shove "diversity panels" down their employees throats, then?
namlem 9y ago
Are they contrarians, or are they simply genuine racists or misogynists?

tomsthumb 9y ago

On the other hand, I have seen a coworker strongly imply that someone is a white nationalist for suggesting that it’s possible to be a non-racist republican.

cagenut 9y ago
it is not
enraged_camel 9y ago
One can be a non-racist conservative, in the sense of wanting a smaller government and less regulation. However, today’s Republican Party is undeniably racist, and supporting them also makes one racist in my opinion. This is especially true since today’s Republican Party is not actually conservative. One cannot want smaller government while simultaneously supporting a drastic increase in immigration and border security and a whopping $25 billion for a 2000-mile long wall.
- Pxtl 9y ago
  You don't have to be racist to support the modern Republicans, but you do have to decide that racism really isn't a deal-breaker for you.
  - s2g 9y ago
    Which is pretty much the same thing.
  - Daishiman 9y ago
    If racism isn't a deal-breaker for you...
    - berberous 9y ago
      In a multi-party system, I would agree with your implication. But when you have a system with only two realistic choices, it is possible to vote for a candidate because you think the other one is even worse, without endorsing the candidate you voted for.
- fouric 9y ago
  "undeniably racist"? I'm curious. Do tell more.
- samiru 9y ago
  And you sound like a populist. How one can have a meaningful debate when nothing you say is strictly true?
- dang 9y ago
  Please keep standard political talking points off HN. If you repeat something stock, it will get stock responses. That makes it off-topic on a site dedicated to curiosity. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - tessierashpool 9y ago
cgag 9y ago
Lmao at people acting like people are insane for feeling right wing people are alienated and there being not one but two comments in this thread saying being a republican makes you a racist.
- sho 9y ago
  You really "LMAO"? Because you should be "fearing your ass off" when people are afraid to express their legitimate political views. This has all happened before and it wasn't pretty. update: come on downvoters. At least give me a clue.
  - cgag 9y ago
    It's funny in the fact that it's so obviously absurd but the people doing it don't see it. It's both funny and scary depending on how much I think about it.
greglindahl 9y ago
Thanks for the anecdote. Was a reminder of "let's be respectful, now!" good enough to solve the problem?
- ameister14 9y ago
  nice, pointing out that he used an anecdote to respond to a person also basing their opinion on anecdotes
  - greglindahl 9y ago
    Oh, I'm fine with anecdotes responding to anecdotes. I was just wondering what happened next.
- tomsthumb 9y ago
  It took many more words, several days and a lot of listening from both sides for a more reasonable position to emerge.
crdoconnor 9y ago
I noticed a similar view appearing more than once in the UK: "if you voted for Brexit you're probably a racist". I think people like this were ironically and unwittingly recruiting people to the other side. Which is unfortunate.
- Chris2048 9y ago
  Had a friend who mused (not sure if serious, but tone somewhat suggested it) that'd he'd travel in such a way to "avoid the racist counties" (i.e. majority brexit)...
- abusoufiyan 9y ago
  >I think people like this were ironically and unwittingly recruiting people to the other side. Which is unfortunate. If you're dumb enough to switch how you vote on something that is unquestionably going to change your personal economic, social, and political future because someone went a little overboard in calling people racists, then you deserve to have your country decline.

cowmix 9y ago

If these people want to know what it is like to be "stifled" in the workplace, be an atheist or lefty in Texas.

jfaucett 9y ago
Really? (warning anecdotes :), When I lived in the south east (Alabama / Georgia), I didn't notice any stifling because I was an atheist. Sure, you had to deal with people's super religious fundamentalist beliefs which got expressed all the time, but my barrage of dissenting opinions didn't get any backlash, except for the "prayer for my lost soul" which did happen on occasion.
- zebnyc 9y ago
  To add my 2 cents, I was employed in Macon, Georgia by a small software firm around the time the Bush administrating was drumming up support to attack Iraq. I was opposed to it and let my feelings be known amongst my colleagues. My colleagues would agree with my POV, go home and then come back the next day and attack me. The cycle repeated itself a few times before I realized they were going home to Fox News everyday. Unfortunately for me, I discussed these opinions in the cafetaria. When they downsized a short while later, I was the first one to be let go. Since then I never discuss politics at work, even with folks I trust,
tc313 9y ago
Do you live/work in Texas? The big cities (Austin, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio) are overwhelmingly liberal.
- brandonmenc 9y ago
  They are also full of people who fled small Texas towns to get away from stifling religious upbringings.
filesystem 9y ago
I'm interested in hearing more about this. Is it common for religion to be discussed in the workplace in Texas?

idlewords 9y ago

Thiel spoke on national television at the National Republican Convention. He made the choice to bring his private political beliefs into the public sphere, and has no grounds to complain for catching heat for them.

jnbiche 9y ago
This has been downvoted, but this is an important distinction that our legal system even recognizes. There's a qualitative difference between a "public person" (like Thiel) and a "private person" like some random co-worker who doesn't tour around doing speeches and writing opinion pieces.
- idlewords 9y ago
  Agreed. Moreover, speaking at a nationally-televised political convention is an inherently public, political act.
sturgill 9y ago
And when did Brendan Eich make public comments? When he privately donated to a cause? You can be dismissed from leading a company today by privately supporting conservative causes. And there’s very little threat of a liberal CEO being dismissed independent of his private/public statements. I have no desire to speak to any particular political subject in this forum; but it’s incredibly disingenuous to pretend this only happens to people who take public conservative positions. Though even the charitable reading of your statement suggests that you believe that conservatives should stay in the closest. Which is a fascinating turn to say the least... And, as a religious conservative guy in tech I’ll add my point of view: it’s okay to talk politics at work as long as you agree with everyone else. Those of us with dissenting world paradigms spend most of the day quietly wishing these conversations would end. Because there isn’t debate to be had at work; dissenting views are not welcome.
- idlewords 9y ago
  I am speaking specifically about Peter Thiel. You and I probably agree about Brendan Eich. I also agree that tech companies can be a difficult place for constructive political debate (or even agree-to-disagree conversations), and I do not think this is a good thing.

downandout 9y ago

If he can't take the heat he should stay out of the kitchen. I think that's the whole point though. The article is saying that there is too much heat simply because they express their opposing viewpoints. "Stay out of the kitchen" means "close your mouth around Silicon Valley liberals" or you'll experience backlash. While this may not be your personal experience, the article essentially says that the somewhat ironic message coming out of the Valley from people in the "party of tolerance" is that they tolerate everyone except those that have opposing viewpoints.

twblalock 9y ago
> "Stay out of the kitchen" means "close your mouth around Silicon Valley liberals" or you'll experience backlash. No, it means don't expect to be able to say controversial stuff without people who disagree with you also having their say.
- downandout 9y ago
  The problem is that among this crowd, simply saying "I voted for Trump" or "I hated Hillary so I just didn't vote" is considered "controversial" and worthy of personal and professional backlash.
  - webkike 9y ago
    Voting for an openly sexist person is extremely controversial. I don't find "I hated Hillary so I just didn't vote" controversial at all.
    - downandout 9y ago
      Your comment is a perfect example of the Valley's intense hatred of any remotely conservative viewpoint that the article is referring to. People have all kinds of reasons for voting for a particular candidate. It doesn't mean they endorse all of their actions or views. In this last election, I suspect that many Trump votes were made simply because they didn't like Hillary, and there were only two choices.

sebleon 9y ago

> If he can't take the heat he should stay out of the kitchen Exactly, that's why he moved away.

vr46 9y ago
Lol. Also, isn’t he leaving to find his own echo chamber?
- tessierashpool 9y ago
  He wanted a safe space.
twblalock 9y ago
He will find out soon enough that people don't like him no matter how far away from them he lives.

unapprovedviews 9y ago

> libertarian/pro-gun friends have not been shy about their political views and it hasn't hurt their tech careers at all It's interesting that you specifically choose "libertarian". While maybe technically further to the right than Republican it truly seems supporting specifically Republican candidates is wholly furiously unacceptable in the bay area -- especially at tech companies. Try wearing a pin, t-shirt, hat, etc... "openly" supporting Trump to a tech company in the city -- actually for the safety of your career and physical self better not.

twblalock 9y ago
I know "normal" Republicans as well. I was using libertarianism as an example of an extreme on the political spectrum, as I used socialism as the opposite extreme. At my last job, several employees openly supported Trump, and they didn't suffer any consequences.
- djrogers 9y ago
  Libertarian views are far less extreme in many ways than modern Republican views, and often align rather closely with progressive/democrat views. In fact, the libertarian ethos evolved from classic liberalism, including support of LGBT issues, racial and gender equality, and a largely non-interventionist global view.
  - ianai 9y ago
    Tell that to the libertarians of Las Vegas.
  - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
    Republican-voting libertarians are in some ways worse than normal Republicans. Unlike normal Republicans who simply don't believe that their policies are violating people's rights, Republican-voting libertarians freely admit that the policies they are supporting (their stated position is against the policies, but they still support them with their votes) violate people's right, but they go along with them so that they can get a tax break.

strangeloops85 9y ago

Yeah I don't get it either, especially the "feeling alienated" part. Does that include being feted and having a respectful discussion with your liberal friend and old colleague, Reid Hoffman, on the Stanford campus on Jan. 31 of this year, moderated by a very sympathetic Niall Ferguson? With laudatory words and praise from the President and Provost? https://news.stanford.edu/2018/02/01/cardinal-conversation-reid-hoffman-peter-thiel-technology-politics/ https://news.stanford.edu/2018/02/01/cardinal-conversation-r... Look, if you're going to speak at the RNC and actively support Trump, you will be on the opposite side of a super-majority of college-educated people in this country at this point. And definitely a large super-majority of people under 35, women, Asian Americans, Latinos and African Americans. So if you're surrounded by such people, and are loudly promoting such views, don't expect your interlocutors to not criticize them, or necessarily want to hear them ad nauseum. The evidence however suggests that Mr. Thiel is certainly being given PLENTY of platforms to continue expressing his viewpoints in a respectful manner in front of influential crowds of people, including students. Who is pushing this whole narrative?

manfredo 9y ago
This article isn't just about Peter Thiel, it's about tech workers in general. Not everyone has the luxury of being a billionaire, and knowing that they live comfortably for the rest of their lives even if they become unemployable. The sentiments expressed by quotes in this article: > People in Silicon Valley “openly lie to one another out of fear of losing their jobs or being publicly crucified..." > Sometimes Silicon Valley venture-capital investors and startup founders “have a certain way of thinking, and if you don’t fit into that way of thinking you’re not in the cool club” are things that I can absolutely identify with. And I consider myself a moderate liberal, I can only imagine what mainstream conservatives are thinking.
- BadassFractal 9y ago
  Same, as another founder. And same, I would consider myself pretty liberal. Pro choice, anti military-industrial complex, anti prison complex, pro legalization, sex positive, pro gay marriage, pro universal healthcare, against church and state coupling, non-climate change denier, pro science, yada yada, you name it. Admittedly, I don't even like the term "conservative", like Naval would say, pinning labels onto yourself only forces you into static positions that you end up having to defend, even if you don't 100% buy into them. I simply happen to have certain stances and ideas that are in opposition to the mainstream thought of SV. As much as I'd love to discuss them, potentially learning more about them myself and (gasp!) even changing my mind in the process, I'm not comfortable doing it. There's a high chance I will be immediately labeled as "racist / sexist / bigot / white supremacist / [fill in the blank]" for even contemplating disagreement on these topics (let's take "diversity" or how we're handling it as a society as an example) without any supporting evidence. Unfortunately, as of today, bigoteering has 0% burden on the person making the accusation and 100% of the weight put on the accused. It's always safe to call someone a witch, but proving them wrong in one's defense is nigh impossible. Ironically, the most open minded and considerate conversations about diversity that I've ever had were with black coworkers. I've learned plenty from them, changed my stance several times, realized I didn't know that much before. The worst were almost always with overrepresented majorities who were "stepping in to speak up for their less-advantaged brethren". I've never learned anything from them on the topics they were so zealous about. It's the diversity version of "white knighting". It's hard not to become jaded and assume that most people in this latter category don't actually care, and just want to establish themselves at the top of the moral hierarchy through vacuous virtue signaling. It's disappointing.

manfredo 9y ago

I work in the Bay Area and I have personally worked with (as in, on the same team with and working directly in cooperation. CEOs, founders, etc. are not included in this count), exactly one person who discussed their conservative views. This is in comparison to hundreds of liberals. Sure, you may be able to identify at least one person on variety of ends of the political spectrum, but I don't think anyone can sanely deny a vast under representation of conservatives in Silicon Valley. Granted, Silicon Valley itself is politically imbalanced. But even in San Francisco 9% [1] of voters voted Republican in 2016.Despite that, I haven't witnessed anything close to that share of conservatives in my tech jobs - even in my jobs lower in the Peninsula and in South Bay. Adding this as an edit: Also, do you work in the Bay Area currently (you mentioned you grew up there)? There is a pretty substantial discrepancy between voicing political views in high school and college vs. when people actually start working. I have met more than an order of magnitude more conservatives and non-liberals in 4 years of university in the Bay Area as compared working in tech there - 25 to 30 in unviersity vs. exactly 1 in industry. Also edited in the fact that I work in the Bay Area in the first sentence, so I realized I didn't mention it until the last.

birken 9y ago
Just to counter this anecdata, the startup I used to work at was founded by 4 conservatives, 2 of whom met working in the George W Bush White House. We used to discuss and debate all sorts of politic topics, and in fact I was quite often in the minority (a position that didn't bother me... it was a good way to learn different perspective on some key issues). They were then and I'm sure still now are quite openly conservative and happy to debate politics (in appropriate settings). They didn't hide it publicly either, for example in the early days of the 2016 presidential election they had Jeb Bush come over and give a talk. Jeb was made fun of quite a bit for the manner in which he put on the company swag [1]. The company has raised hundreds of millions of dollars and has hundreds of employees. In my experience I didn't notice a single situation in which their conservative views had negative impacts on the company. In fact I think their conservative background helped the company raise money from VCs, who I'd wager are more conservative than average. 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBg6hU5zXDA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBg6hU5zXDA

merpnderp 9y ago

I’ve had a colleague straight up say everyone who isn’t standing up to Trump or agrees with any of his policies is a Nazi apologist.

andybak 9y ago
There might be element of "strategic manoeuvring" here. Some people stake a position further out than their genuine views because they are trying to influence people's behaviour. I find myself doing it occasionally albeit not consciously. It's essentially related to the negotiation strategy of starting with a low offer so you've got room to move towards your real price. Related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
- filesystem 9y ago
  Forgive me, but I don't think that your comparison holds any water. I don't think anyone would begin a salary negotiation by comparing their co-workers to a group that committed the most horrific genocide in human history. It's simply a cheap tactic that is used in an attempt to de-legitimize opposing viewpoints and end conversations.
tessierashpool 9y ago
But this is probably true. Trump is very very different from a mainstream Republican. In 2016, mainstream Republicans were all calling him an insane criminal. Today, psychologists are endorsing the "insane" part, his long record of legal problems arguably endorses the "criminal" part, and the Mueller investigation looks extremely likely to endorse the "criminal" part as well. Trump's father was arrested at a KKK rally. Trump brought fringe white supremacists into the White House, and the only serious mainstream politician he brought into the White House was named after multiple Civil War generals who all fought for the Confederacy. After Charlottesville, Trump defended the white supremacists who marched. I think you could argue that failing to stand up to Trump only makes you an apologist for a Nazi apologist. Beyond that, though, your co-worker is basically just objectively correct. Many mainstream Republicans have voiced the same opinion, although many of them recanted once he took office. (And many of them continued voicing this opinion regardless.)

T2_t2 9y ago

Isn't the rebuttal your post the heart of the whole current, I'm not even sure how to describe it, "listen" movement: your experience won't be the same as anyone else's? I wonder why that doesn't extend to a white, male, gay, conservative? I also think it is odd that we can see the flaws in everyone everywhere else, but the flaws in our own environ seem so hard to spot. I'm reminded of this in these times: http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html > Diff present ideas against those of various past cultures, and see what you get. Some will be shocking by present standards. Ok, fine; but which might also be true?

twblalock 9y ago
Thiel has a larger platform for his views than most people, and his success in Silicon Valley is ironically the reason he gets such a platform. He gets blowback because people are listening, and don't like what he says. Everyone's right to free speech is maximized when he says what he thinks and people who disagree with him say what they think.
- manfredo 9y ago
  This article isn't mainly about Thiel. He's in the rare position in that he knows he can live comfortably for the rest of his life even if his employment opportunities are reduced to zero. This article is more about overall atmosphere and culture experienced by standard tech workers. The full excerpt from Tim Ferris (part of which OP's article quoted) really captures this: > Now, more and more, I feel like it's a Russian nesting doll of facades -- Washington DC with fewer neck ties, where people openly lie to one another out of fear of losing their jobs or being publicly crucified. It's weird, unsettling, and, frankly, really dangerous. There's way too much power here for politeness to be sustainable. If no one feels they can say "Hey, I know it makes everyone uncomfortable, but I think there's a leak in the fuel rods in this nuclear submarine..." we're headed for big trouble. I can definitely identify with this sentiment.
anigbrowl 9y ago
I wonder why that doesn't extend to a white, male, gay, conservative? Thiel has been around for a long time and his views have been given extensive consideration - I'd say he's a well known public figure out here on the west coast. It seems to me that people have listened to him and that a significant fraction have subsequently arrived at a negative conclusion about him.

cgag 9y ago

The people I'm honest with about my politics are people I've sort of slowly sussed out as cool, we're all pretty afraid to state many of our actual opinions because we're not rich. I don't care very much but there are a ton of people out there afraid of being damore'd.

mrep 9y ago
> I don't care very much but there are a ton of people out there afraid of being damore'd. Seriously, here is how it went down from what I remember: Damore writes controversial internal only paper -> another googler takes the document meant for internal only viewing and shares it with the media -> someone removes most/all graphs and citations to make it look more like an opinion piece (most likely to flame up more media attention) -> journalist posts internal document without permission from company. That is at least 2 people going out of there way (in a most likely illegal way too) essentially trying to start a witch hunt on this guy and ruin his life for writing 1 paper just because they do not agree with him.
- throwaway1748 9y ago
  The real problem is how much of a win that tactic was for Gizmodo and others who published the incomplete document in bad faith. Clickbait sensationalism in media, particularly around race and gender issues, created this environment.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    And Gizmodo is the new incarnation of Gawker, sued for obnoxious journalism in the first place..
abusoufiyan 9y ago
Just want to point out that this is life in America for most minorities / women. We all have conversations amongst each other we would never have in front of others precisely because we know that our white / male bosses will take it poorly and treat us differently if they hear it.

dcow 9y ago

From my perspective, it's the culture that develops around the "liberal politics" that is the issue. I don't think anyone is complaining about "getting heat for political views". I mean that's just politics. What I've experienced at various companies, though, is that the culture becomes infected with the politics to a point where it impacts the way companies operate and even individual employees' ability to perform their job at a capacity that can produce value. This is where I think it crosses the line. Effectively, companies or individuals end up handicapped by the political agenda. And that makes zero sense rationally for the business. It's literally not their business to be in politics. I'm hesitant to share anecdotes so I'll keep them fuzzy, but a few things I've seen are along the lines of places removing a comedic joke item because it /might/ give a newcomer the impression that the place "normalizes fascism" (rationale was fear someone wouldn't understand it's a joke and thus let's err on the side of keeping the space sterile), and hiring/comp policies designed around explicitly not paying men more than woman for the same role (everyone's the same role when your company doesn't have roles...) regardless of experience, performance, market, etc. at the expense of acquiring or retaining outstanding talent. And look what happened at Google... It all comes from good intentions, but IMO it really just misses the mark and reduces an otherwise complex and human landscape to arbitrary statistics and n=1 anecdotes. There is very little intellectual rigor, or proven methodology and a lot of pandering to the political atmosphere (and this happens at places juggling millions of dollars of investor capital). On top of that, I don't understand why the office needs to be the place to explore these issues. If there are objectively systemic issues and discrepancies between e.g. genders in the US today that need correction, then we need to solve those with government policy and social activism. And if our society and our system of government does not respond, perhaps you just have to grow up realize that despite your self-endowed intellectual infallibility, some other people disagree and you might be barking up the wrong tree. Or, don't concede and keep fighting for justice, but don't bring it to work because you're too impatient or lack the perseverance to see your issue through at local, state, and national levels. So even if other areas might have (for the sake of the argument), on average, more jerks that just don't get it or have a few things to learn about being inclusive and respectful in the way they conduct their daily lives, people don't build operational business policies around solving the perceived problems or shortcomings (not saying HR departments can't lay ground rules, but I'm talking about operational strategies). And that's the difference between an office in SF and an office in NYC or Boston, or Austin, etc. I would not be surprised if the fact that people find some of Thiel's politics to be unfavorable is impacting his ability to function professionally in the Bay Area. When people's professional livelihood is at steak, of course they will gravitate towards communities where they are not otherwise encumbered. In the case of Thiel, money seems less of an issue, so I suspect he's also making a social statement about the state of affairs down by the bay. Celebrate or listen, but I hope you choose to listen because talent and money are all SV has got going for it, and if those things leave you can kiss the glory days goodbye. /2cents

strangeloops85 9y ago

Also! As Kim-Mai Cutler pointed out on Twitter, Silicon Valley's positions are not new!: "Andy Grove gave to reproductive rights, Gordon Moore to conservation, HP was one of the very first employers to offer healthcare coverage, to hire Asian & African Americans like Art Fong & Roy Clay." Silicon Valley has always been different from the rest of the U.S. The "H.P. way" was in its time a radical and progressive thing.

guelo 9y ago

Conservative propaganda has learned from the left how powerful victimology, feeling persecuted, is. White resentment is through the roof when I talk politics with a lot of my white friends.

mrtesthah 9y ago
White resentment becomes possible only when one ceases to care about facts. (Ex. http://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/rm/reports/cerd.pdf http://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/rm/reports/cerd.pdf)
- WaxProlix 9y ago
  This is part of what makes it so pernicious - they feel persecuted, but everyone else can see that they're firmly in control of everything. So it gets pointed out that they're not actually persecuted, which makes the White Moderate feel more persecuted and ignored, pushing them further right. Frustrating, but I don't know what you can do about it.
  - andybak 9y ago
    "They" is a very dangerous word in this concept because despite the genuine advantages of being white - there are many white people who are powerless and have had shitty lives. Inter-group vs intra-group differences. Someone from a minority might well have had an better life with more opportunities than someone from a privileged class. Comparing groups does not translate into comparing individuals (interestingly this is the same intellectual shortcut that leads to racism)
    - WaxProlix 9y ago
      > genuine advantages of being white The folks I'm mostly talking about don't actually believe in that, so obviously my "they" was too broad, indeed. > Someone from a minority might well have had an better life with more opportunities than someone from a privileged class. I don't think this has anything to do with what I'm talking about, except maybe as an intentional deflection? We're talking about white resentment as a phenomenon, not Bill the blue collar veteran who was tricked into plundering loot for Halliburton in 2004 or something. > Comparing groups does not translate into comparing individuals (interestingly this is the same intellectual shortcut that leads to racism) Discussing race as a phenomenon doesn't make you racist, and this talking point is often used by alt-righters to make some sort of "actually, anti-racists are the REAL racists" narrative. I don't buy it. edit: My views are failing in the marketplace of ideas! Feel free to leave a comment if you want to engage.

newnewpdro 9y ago

> Work is for working; it's not a debating society, and especially not when the debating is done in bad faith. If this were actually true of the current milieu of tech employment in the bay area, I'd likely still be a willing and active participant in that workforce. Substantial energy is wasted discussing ideologies and arranging/having meetings on what are fundamentally social issues we're not realistically fixing in the short-term at the workplace from the bottom-up. The reasons appeared largely focused on satisfying the expectations of a vocal minority of SJW-types bringing this crap into the workplace with HR departments jumping at the opportunity to appear busy and influential. Edit: Maybe my experiences were unique, though my social circles were complaining of similar things at their respective startups.

spookthesunset 9y ago
> SJW Ah the SJW boogyman. A quick way to get anybody with a functioning brain to dismiss everything you say.
- lkerrekfjk 9y ago
  > Ah the SJW boogyman. A quick way to get anybody with a functioning brain to dismiss everything you say. lol, this stuff is real: > Concerning White Fragility > All white people are racist and, far from absolving them, this places an urgent burden on each and all. https://np.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/7asxk7/concerning_white_fragility/ https://np.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/7asxk7/concernin... You can dismiss the problem all you want and act like these crazies don't exist, but they do and they are actively trying to kick out anybody that doesn't fall in line with their ideology from different circles where they operate.
- Chris2048 9y ago
  It's just the counterpart of the "racist" boogyman. Why is it terrible to dismiss people by calling them SJWs, but not calling them racist.
  - abusoufiyan 9y ago

leshow 9y ago

> Work is for working; it's not a debating society, and especially not when the debating is done in bad faith. If this were true the far left wouldn't be able to discuss social issues at work either, but they are.

noty 9y ago

I think, contrary to what many people are saying, that what has really happened is that it has never been easier to hold an opinion about almost anything. Previously you had to at least partly subscribe to some sort of ideology that was somewhat reasoned. Which meant that you were prepared when you met someone who didn't agree with because most ideologies reason around the same things. Today there are so many source of information that you are never really forced to dive deeper into something. If you see something repeated enough you get a very strong sense of it being true. Many fringe opinions spread without people realizing that they are just that. They aren't used to people disagreeing with them so when people do so strongly they feel alienated. In regards to Thiel moving, and other VCs praising China, I think that has more to do with people in general becoming more skeptical about SV. Which is a bad thing if you are a VC and are selling "disruption", but probably a good thing for engineers.

shard972 9y ago

I notice you didn't include Alt-right in there which at the moment seem to be political ideology on a big rise and in my personal opinion, I think it's generally less radical than communism. Consider though that one thing the alt-right will never accept is that racial diversity in the workplace is a net positive in itself. Whether it's true or false, it's just apart of the parcel. Now how would someone like that feel comfortable in a workplace that tells you that being against racial diversity is racist? You don't even have to bring up your opinions, it's beamed to you on a regular basis through meetings, announcements and slack conversations. I personally had a similar experience recently at my job in Australia in relation to the vote on gay marriage. Even though I am myself gay and have a boyfriend, I was in favour of a plebiscite. This was in complete opposition to rest of the company, who went so far as to joint write a letter with other companies demanding the government not allow a plebiscite and to instead just pass gay marriage without a public vote. There was alot of implication around that anyone who disagreed wanted the vote for a chance to vote no and more importantly, to allow for an advertising campaign against gays to intimidate the community as a whole. People made the claim around myself that obvious the reason people want the plebecide is because they are homophobic racist rednecks. I don't know maybe i'm just rambling at this point but It's just not nice to work in an environment where you have to listen to people trash your character based on your beliefs and you can't say anything otherwise your "discussing politics" and "rocking the boat".

andybak 9y ago
> being against racial diversity is racist That made me stop and think. I'm trying to imagine a picture of someone who is against racial diversity but isn't remotely racist and whilst I agree there's no logical contradiction inherent in that position I do struggle to think of a realistic portrait of such an individual. I might be missing something here but can you spell out this position for me in a bit more detail? I'm genuinely interested as I wonder if my definition of "racist" or my definition of "against racial diversity" might be different to yours.
- shard972 9y ago
  Consider that this is the majority consensus in Japan and China. Imagine going to japan and saying "guys, this workplace is far too asian, what we really need here is some more indians, africans and arabs to get this workplace into the 21st century". I think most people here could see that not going over well. Would we then think of china and japan as mostly racist? I don't really want to get into racist/racial debate on HN, other than to say it's not some tiny opinion only held by white supremacists and neo-nazis. That and you will find if you look into the research on race differences (eg: genetic influences on IQ) that these topics are not even close to be declared settled and are still hotly contested.

lagadu 9y ago

> Work is for working; it's not a debating society, and especially not when the debating is done in bad faith. Maybe I'm biased because not being in the US most of my knowledge about it is from HN links and discussions along with a few other blog posts here and there but: if that were true, we wouldn't be seeing "but mah inclusion!" posts and discussions on/about American startups every single day around here.

4bpp 9y ago

> It seems to me, from personal experience, that the people who feel alienated are the ones who bring politics to work in an overbearing contrarian way, seeking to cause offense under the guise of "debate," and then pretend to be shocked when people don't want to put up with their shit. Like many other commenters in this thread, you choose a wording that would be more appropriate if the extent of the problem were obnoxious Republicans not getting invited to happy hour/their coworkers' birthday party/?. The type of situation that people complain about, whether it is accurate or not, seems to be more along the lines that if you are in the wrong half of Silicon Valley companies, being recognised as deviating from the obnoxious Democrat position on any issue of import may result in your colleagues organising to report you to HR and/or rile up a small city's worth of Twitter users to call for your company to terminate you or be boycotted itself, not to mention potential long-term consequences along the lines of easily googleable Medium articles with your name on them or entries in an unknown number of blacklists circulated to recruiters through activist backchannels. How accurate or common any of these are is completely up to discussion, but dismissing them as if any of what is alleged amounts to a normal and healthy free speech reaction just seems disingenuous.

oh_sigh 9y ago

My observation at a big-4 SV tech company is that people constantly bring up anti-Trump and basically anti-conservative viewpoints, but very rarely do conservatives bring up anti-liberal viewpoints. Thankfully, most people there don't talk about politics. Maybe 5% of the population are constantly bringing it up though, rarely in direct work functions, but in any other message board or forum.

gameswithgo 9y ago

>Peter Thiel has been more politically vocal than most, and he is vocal about things he knows to be unpopular. He can't be surprised that people who disagree with him are also vocal. If he can't take the heat he should stay out of the kitchen. He has to put up with people thinking he is an asshole. We the proletariat have to put up with the people he can buy into power, which affects our livelihood, health, the future of our society. If I had the money to sue him out of existence, as he is wont to do to others, I would. Fuck him.

altoz 9y ago

Not surprising: Nearly everyone from Silicon Valley that's progressive/liberal thinks there's no problem or that the problem is something else. Nearly everyone not fitting the description above thinks there's a problem and that it alienates them.

tessierashpool 9y ago

the conservative claim to being "silenced" is a reflection of privilege. for instance, the icon here is Peter Thiel, a billionaire who complains about being victimized because people tell him he's in the wrong. you will and should face ostracism and other consequences for saying, believing, and doing things that people find abhorrent or evil. free speech means you're free to believe those things, and everybody else is free to call you evil, and coordinate accordingly. conservatism in the United States has enabled the murder of countless children, both through the NRA's fanaticism re assault weapons, and through the weird effective impunity police have re criminal prosecution, even after killing children. conservatism in the US has enabled the destruction of the environment. the Trump campaign and presidency have seen a rapid escalation of hate crimes, and after Charlottesville the president explicitly defended the white supremacists in attendance. there is so much blood on the hands of the conservative movement. so much racism. so much sexism. so much fear-mongering and rabble-rousing. how could you possibly expect to do that kind of thing without facing CRITICISM? how could you possibly be the victims here?

dreit1 9y ago
This is the exact type of commentary the article is talking. This conservative strawman you’ve built is far from average. In this absurd, inflammatory commentary replace the conservative boogeyman with a Muslim boogeyman or a gay boogeyman and realize you’re using the exact same type of rhetoric as the people you despise
- tessierashpool 9y ago
  is it absurd to claim that the NRA's refusal to compromise re assault weapons has led to the death of many kids in American schools? what is the absurd part here? how many kids can a gay person be alleged to have killed just by being gay? there is no conservative boogeyman in my post. I am referring to the practical effects of policy decisions.
  - Rebelgecko 9y ago
    > is it absurd to claim that the NRA's refusal to compromise re assault weapons has led to the death of many kids in American schools? Honestly I think it is, although if I were having a discussion with a coworker I would couch it in slightly different terms, because many of my coworkers aren't very familiar with guns. e.g. defining assault weapons (varies depending on locale), asking why they are concerned about this like bayonet lugs, are they aware of anyone who has been killed by a bayonet charge in the US since the Civil War, what's wrong with barrel shrouds, etc

burnte 9y ago

Thiel's real problem is that he doesn't have "conservative" views as much as he has totalitarian and abusive views. He feels might makes right, and that wealth makes might. He's in a group that feel they should be free from restrictions of normal people, and that corporate oligarchy is fine as long as they're on top. He's openly elitist, and THAT is something SV doesn't look nicely upon.

scarface74 9y ago

It's not liberterianism or even standard Republicanism that seems to be an anathema to the tech crowd. It's populism and religious conservatism. But sense I'm neither populist or a religious conservative, I'm just as much in the bubble as anyone.

nasredin 9y ago
Exactly! Your coworkers just want you to leave your religion and xenophobia and or mild racism at home.
- scarface74 9y ago
  Why should anyone at work know my religious or political views? My views are mostly in line with the tech crowd - except I found I’m far more weary of government intervention into tech than many on HN. But I steer clear of political discussions at work.

lkerrekfjk 9y ago

> Some of my most libertarian/pro-gun friends have not been shy about their political views and it hasn't hurt their tech careers at all. They are far more welcome here than liberals are in other parts of the country. Do your friends work at Twitter? Github? Google? obviously they don't or they would have gotten fired for their political views by now.

_pmf_ 9y ago

> Work is for working; it's not a debating society Why does Google shove "diversity panels" down their employees throats, then?

namlem 9y ago

Are they contrarians, or are they simply genuine racists or misogynists?