6 ms·

"Create internal systems for employees to anonymously report microaggressions. " This is the 'happy path' to ideological totalitarianism, and it's a scary stat

"Create internal systems for employees to anonymously report microaggressions. " This is the 'happy path' to ideological totalitarianism, and it's a scary statement. In the UC system, it is now considered a 'micro aggression' to make the statement 'America is a Meritocracy'. Why? Because it doesn't necessarily reflect the fact that for some people it's harder than others. Surely - there's a lot to be debated about the statement. But that it cannot be said, or is even considered problematic is utterly Orwellian. The author makes the case of 'undue or overly harsh' criticism of Black employees? Unfortunately, this is a difficult thing to measure, and if FB turns into a 'government office' - it simply won't be possible to give even a fair assessment without the fear or being labelled a racist. I'm actually quite sensitive to aphxtron's comment above about the insecurities of being black in tech, and there is work to do ... but I think the intersectional / authoritarian approach, especially those whereby we 'assume racism' is wrong. I don't think the Colin Kaepernick approach is going to work on this, I think it's just going to take a while.

arethuza 8y ago
The chap who came up with the term "meritocracy" actually did it in a dystopian novel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy A recent comment by the author, Michael Dunlop Young: "It is good sense to appoint individual people to jobs on their merit. It is the opposite when those who are judged to have merit of a particular kind harden into a new social class without room in it for others."
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  This is a very thoughtful comment and I don't think it should be downvoted. I particularly appreciate last quote it's utterly relevant in the Valley.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - arethuza 8y ago
    I can't comment on the Valley, not having spent a huge amount of time there, but here in the UK I tend to find that anyone using the term "meritocracy" seriously tends to use it in a rather self justifying way "we are a meritocracy, I have been successful, therefore I have merit therefore I deserve all the rewards I can get". However, I do welcome the type of meritocracy where people like Aneurin Bevan can go on to influence our lives in such a positive way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aneurin_Bevan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aneurin_Bevan [He started work down a mine at 13 and went on to found the NHS]. Also, on the military side it used to be possible for someone to rise from private soldier to Chief of the Imperial General Staff - something, even with a far smaller military, would be impossible today - a point made by the military historian Richard Holmes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_William_Robertson,_1st_Baronet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_William_Robertson,_1st_Bar...
    - sonnyblarney 8y ago
      Most corporate systems are highly meritocratic, and high school dropouts who have no skills or ability are not rising to the top. The military is a completely alternative universe, and by the way many commissioned soldiers do make the jump to the officer class.
- repolfx 8y ago
  What does the last sentence mean, exactly? The word meritocracy doesn't refer to an actual formalised class system, anywhere or in any time in history. This appears to a flawed attempt to seem balanced - meritocracy is good when it means appointing people based on merit (which is what it always means) and bad when it means this thing that doesn't actually exist. Trying to ban the word meritocracy like they did at GitHub is just the result of certain sorts of people (who loudly claim to be totally not racist or sexist at all) secretly believing that formalised hiring and promotion processes, which is what they usually mean by the word meritocracy, will exclude their chosen favourite minorities.
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    The commenter points out that the cynicism towards the term 'meritocracy' is actually a part of the very birth of the term into the English language, which is a very good point. 'Meritocracy' possibly creates another class based system, just defined in the terms of whoever is responsible for defining what 'merit' is. I believe that in general 'meritocracy' is a good thing, I don't think we should be fundamentally cynical about it ... but the OP's comment is definitely relevant.
    - arethuza 8y ago
      Note that I'm not cynical about the concept of meritocracy - just how the term is used.
vonmoltke 8y ago
> I don't think the Colin Kaepernick approach is going to work on this, I think it's just going to take a while. Did you mean "do" rather than "don't"? If not, I'm not sure how to interpret that statement.
eropple 8y ago
> In the UC system, it is now considered a 'micro aggression' to make the statement 'America is a Meritocracy'. Why? Because it doesn't necessarily reflect the fact that for some people it's harder than others Alternate character interpretation: the phrase "meritocracy" has turned into a dogwhistle for white supremacists and as such its use effectively reifies a white-supremacist position whether you mean to do so or not. As another example: I do not think that the overwheming majority of folks who use the term "gypped" have a problem with Romani, nut there is history and context to that too and you can't ignore it. Or, if you'd like a more amplified example, consider what the phrase "blood and soil" actually refers to. It's not "Orwellian" to say "hey, that shit hurts people, be conscious of how your actions affect other people." It's polite.
- vonmoltke 8y ago
  > It's not "Orwellian" to say "hey, that shit hurts people, be conscious of how your actions affect other people." It's polite. I think it is Orwellian to declare certain words or phrases "dog whistles" and suppress their usage based on that.
  - eropple 8y ago
    Please explain why identifying the work of white supremacists and similar pustules as their work, and suggesting that decent people should not help them make that work A Thing, is "Orwellian". And to be clear: we know that white supremacists insert these phrases into the public discourse to help strengthen their position through normalization. We know that because they say so. We have the receipts, from Lee Atwater to 4chan galaxy-brain chatter. If you don't want to be thought of as a white supremacist, it's remarkably easy not to parrot their phrases. And nobody's even saying you can't do it if you want to die on that hill. But actions have consequences, don't they?
    - sonnyblarney 8y ago
      "Please explain why identifying the work of white supremacists and similar pustules as their work, and suggesting that decent people should not help them make that work " That's really easy. The statement 'America is a meritocracy' is not remotely a phrase or statement supporting White Supremacy. The fact any reasonable person would try to put such an innocuous statement in the camp of 'White Supremacy' makes me afraid.

arethuza 8y ago

The chap who came up with the term "meritocracy" actually did it in a dystopian novel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy A recent comment by the author, Michael Dunlop Young: "It is good sense to appoint individual people to jobs on their merit. It is the opposite when those who are judged to have merit of a particular kind harden into a new social class without room in it for others."

sonnyblarney 8y ago
This is a very thoughtful comment and I don't think it should be downvoted. I particularly appreciate last quote it's utterly relevant in the Valley.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- arethuza 8y ago
  I can't comment on the Valley, not having spent a huge amount of time there, but here in the UK I tend to find that anyone using the term "meritocracy" seriously tends to use it in a rather self justifying way "we are a meritocracy, I have been successful, therefore I have merit therefore I deserve all the rewards I can get". However, I do welcome the type of meritocracy where people like Aneurin Bevan can go on to influence our lives in such a positive way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aneurin_Bevan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aneurin_Bevan [He started work down a mine at 13 and went on to found the NHS]. Also, on the military side it used to be possible for someone to rise from private soldier to Chief of the Imperial General Staff - something, even with a far smaller military, would be impossible today - a point made by the military historian Richard Holmes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_William_Robertson,_1st_Baronet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_William_Robertson,_1st_Bar...
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    Most corporate systems are highly meritocratic, and high school dropouts who have no skills or ability are not rising to the top. The military is a completely alternative universe, and by the way many commissioned soldiers do make the jump to the officer class.
repolfx 8y ago
What does the last sentence mean, exactly? The word meritocracy doesn't refer to an actual formalised class system, anywhere or in any time in history. This appears to a flawed attempt to seem balanced - meritocracy is good when it means appointing people based on merit (which is what it always means) and bad when it means this thing that doesn't actually exist. Trying to ban the word meritocracy like they did at GitHub is just the result of certain sorts of people (who loudly claim to be totally not racist or sexist at all) secretly believing that formalised hiring and promotion processes, which is what they usually mean by the word meritocracy, will exclude their chosen favourite minorities.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  The commenter points out that the cynicism towards the term 'meritocracy' is actually a part of the very birth of the term into the English language, which is a very good point. 'Meritocracy' possibly creates another class based system, just defined in the terms of whoever is responsible for defining what 'merit' is. I believe that in general 'meritocracy' is a good thing, I don't think we should be fundamentally cynical about it ... but the OP's comment is definitely relevant.
  - arethuza 8y ago
    Note that I'm not cynical about the concept of meritocracy - just how the term is used.

vonmoltke 8y ago

> I don't think the Colin Kaepernick approach is going to work on this, I think it's just going to take a while. Did you mean "do" rather than "don't"? If not, I'm not sure how to interpret that statement.

eropple 8y ago

> In the UC system, it is now considered a 'micro aggression' to make the statement 'America is a Meritocracy'. Why? Because it doesn't necessarily reflect the fact that for some people it's harder than others Alternate character interpretation: the phrase "meritocracy" has turned into a dogwhistle for white supremacists and as such its use effectively reifies a white-supremacist position whether you mean to do so or not. As another example: I do not think that the overwheming majority of folks who use the term "gypped" have a problem with Romani, nut there is history and context to that too and you can't ignore it. Or, if you'd like a more amplified example, consider what the phrase "blood and soil" actually refers to. It's not "Orwellian" to say "hey, that shit hurts people, be conscious of how your actions affect other people." It's polite.

vonmoltke 8y ago
> It's not "Orwellian" to say "hey, that shit hurts people, be conscious of how your actions affect other people." It's polite. I think it is Orwellian to declare certain words or phrases "dog whistles" and suppress their usage based on that.
- eropple 8y ago
  Please explain why identifying the work of white supremacists and similar pustules as their work, and suggesting that decent people should not help them make that work A Thing, is "Orwellian". And to be clear: we know that white supremacists insert these phrases into the public discourse to help strengthen their position through normalization. We know that because they say so. We have the receipts, from Lee Atwater to 4chan galaxy-brain chatter. If you don't want to be thought of as a white supremacist, it's remarkably easy not to parrot their phrases. And nobody's even saying you can't do it if you want to die on that hill. But actions have consequences, don't they?
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    "Please explain why identifying the work of white supremacists and similar pustules as their work, and suggesting that decent people should not help them make that work " That's really easy. The statement 'America is a meritocracy' is not remotely a phrase or statement supporting White Supremacy. The fact any reasonable person would try to put such an innocuous statement in the camp of 'White Supremacy' makes me afraid.