4 ms·

If this is aiming to invoke the tired "virtue signalling" cliché, it's rather vacuous. Kierkegaard's alternative was an armed rebellion. Are you seriously advo

If this is aiming to invoke the tired "virtue signalling" cliché, it's rather vacuous. Kierkegaard's alternative was an armed rebellion. Are you seriously advocating for civil war, and dismissing all peaceful methods of achieving change? That gets to the heart of what's wrong with the concept as it is used by the 4chan crowd these days: The success of democracy is exactly the possibility to effect change without shouldering grave personal risks. Trying to reframe this accomplishment as ineffective, weak, or lazy runs the danger of provoking exactly the sort of dramatic, self-sacrificing gestures that have been in the news recently. In the specific case, maybe quitting would be slightly less dramatic but more forceful form of protest. But it's quite obvious that exists a gray area where it's perfectly legitimate to try to change an organisation, while still being convinced of its overall benefit. Recruitment & retainment are also huge factors for Google's future prospect, making a walk-out with the implied threat of quitting, an effective tool.

jessriedel 8y ago
I don't super disagree, but note that one can argue for a mechanistic explanation of human behavior, with important implications about what we should conclude from that behavior, without implicitly endorsing different behavior or otherwise making an ethical claim.
bilbo0s 8y ago
>The success of democracy is exactly the possibility to effect change without shouldering grave personal risks... True. In effect, we have a civil war every 4 years. During these civil wars there is zero personal risk to the participants. And even still, the largest bloc of us chooses not to participate.
- cyphar 8y ago
  Describing the process of voting and elections as a civil war is something that I think (and no offense meant by this) only be done by an American. No other democracy would describe voting this way (with the exception of dictatorships in democracy's clothing).
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
finnthehuman 8y ago
>making a walk-out with the implied threat of quitting, an effective tool. Unless Google employees are addressing one of the elephants in their house, can any internal criticism of the company be seen as more than showmanship? Andy Rubin is safe to target. He's already gone, and accused of something uncontroversial to hate. Show me a walkout over Dragonfly and I'll show you a news story.
conanbatt 8y ago
> The success of democracy is exactly the possibility to effect change without shouldering grave personal risks I thoroughly enjoyed reading this sentence, because it so succinctly expresses something I find absolutely immoral. The gamble without a downside.
kopo 8y ago
Good comment. But it is not about "forcing" an outcome. These kind of polarizing sensitive issues are never resolved long term through forcing any issue. At their best these movements make people feel the hurt/injustice and need for safety being expressed underneath all the noise/reactions/counter reactions. Once a majority in the room feel it the movement has succeeded. This entire process ofcourse doesn't align neatly with our cultural conditioning that change happens through confrontation and punishment.
propman 8y ago
“The success of democracy is exactly the possibility to effect change without shouldering grave personal risks. Trying to reframe this accomplishment as ineffective, weak, or lazy runs the danger of provoking exactly the sort of dramatic, self-sacrificing gestures that have been in the news recently.“ Wow, that quote is breathtakingly beautiful...and it’s so relavent today. Many have this self righteous feverish belief that their side is good and the other evil. When we as a society begin taking for granted the benefits of democracy and start truly believing we can’t enact change, the number of nut jobs committing violence will absolutely increase. Tribalism today is insane, and our ability to enact change peaceful,h keeps the violence and the bad acting to an extreme minimum. It’s easy to get lost in the chaos. Honestly, I’m completly blown away by that quote and I’m using it as a rebuttal when these topics come up.

jessriedel 8y ago

I don't super disagree, but note that one can argue for a mechanistic explanation of human behavior, with important implications about what we should conclude from that behavior, without implicitly endorsing different behavior or otherwise making an ethical claim.

bilbo0s 8y ago

>The success of democracy is exactly the possibility to effect change without shouldering grave personal risks... True. In effect, we have a civil war every 4 years. During these civil wars there is zero personal risk to the participants. And even still, the largest bloc of us chooses not to participate.

cyphar 8y ago
Describing the process of voting and elections as a civil war is something that I think (and no offense meant by this) only be done by an American. No other democracy would describe voting this way (with the exception of dictatorships in democracy's clothing).

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

finnthehuman 8y ago

>making a walk-out with the implied threat of quitting, an effective tool. Unless Google employees are addressing one of the elephants in their house, can any internal criticism of the company be seen as more than showmanship? Andy Rubin is safe to target. He's already gone, and accused of something uncontroversial to hate. Show me a walkout over Dragonfly and I'll show you a news story.

conanbatt 8y ago

> The success of democracy is exactly the possibility to effect change without shouldering grave personal risks I thoroughly enjoyed reading this sentence, because it so succinctly expresses something I find absolutely immoral. The gamble without a downside.

kopo 8y ago

Good comment. But it is not about "forcing" an outcome. These kind of polarizing sensitive issues are never resolved long term through forcing any issue. At their best these movements make people feel the hurt/injustice and need for safety being expressed underneath all the noise/reactions/counter reactions. Once a majority in the room feel it the movement has succeeded. This entire process ofcourse doesn't align neatly with our cultural conditioning that change happens through confrontation and punishment.

propman 8y ago

“The success of democracy is exactly the possibility to effect change without shouldering grave personal risks. Trying to reframe this accomplishment as ineffective, weak, or lazy runs the danger of provoking exactly the sort of dramatic, self-sacrificing gestures that have been in the news recently.“ Wow, that quote is breathtakingly beautiful...and it’s so relavent today. Many have this self righteous feverish belief that their side is good and the other evil. When we as a society begin taking for granted the benefits of democracy and start truly believing we can’t enact change, the number of nut jobs committing violence will absolutely increase. Tribalism today is insane, and our ability to enact change peaceful,h keeps the violence and the bad acting to an extreme minimum. It’s easy to get lost in the chaos. Honestly, I’m completly blown away by that quote and I’m using it as a rebuttal when these topics come up.