6 ms·

> Not to mention Brendan Eich was kicked out for purely political reasons in a SJW witch-hunt It’s hardly an “SJW witch-hunt” when your boss is donating thousa

by hazz99 6y ago

> Not to mention Brendan Eich was kicked out for purely political reasons in a SJW witch-hunt It’s hardly an “SJW witch-hunt” when your boss is donating thousands of dollars for the explicit purpose of ensuring you don’t have the same rights as other people. That action seems very much at odds with being an effective leader. You must take care of your team.

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
One feature of totalitarism is suppression of dissenting political views. Somehow modern democracy (de)evolved from "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" to current cancel culture.
- hazz99 6y ago
  This has nothing to do with cancel culture, and everything to do with being a bad leader. > Somehow modern democracy (de)evolved from "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" to current cancel culture. Brendan has a right to express his opinion. Mozilla has a right to fire him for it. There's nothing totalitarian here.
  - dogma1138 6y ago
    Would Mozilla be still in its right to fire them if the situation was reversed?
  - josteink 6y ago
    They only did so after the SJW lynch-mob showed up on twitter and demanded him fired. Personally I'm not OK with rule by lynch-mob, and I hope you see how allowing such a culture to take hold may one day backfire, also on the things you hold dear.
    - rocqua 6y ago
      Thing is, if people really feel like "I can't support this company while X is there" are they just supposed to be quiet? Cancel culture is probably toxic to public discussion. But what is the alternative if people want to vote with their feet? If people want to make choices based on their morals, that seems awesome to me. It's only if people are bluffing things into being canceled that I see an issue here.
      - gremlinsinc 6y ago
        > Thing is, if people really feel like "I can't support this company while X is there" are they just supposed to be quiet? This! isn't that the whole point of capitalism? Love it or hate it, dollars = votes. Withholding it via firing or boycotting it's the same deal. The market decides what 'stands' and doesn't, what people can get away with and what they can't. At one point you could get away with refusing service to black people. Pressure from the markets and community changed that. Every change we've gotten is because someone fought back some way. You can't want unfettered capitalism (looking at the right/libertarians), and then cry when capitalist companies bow to pressure from the masses online and cancel shit. Privatize them, go dictator/socialist then the state/constitutions can say how a business is ran, and they maybe censorship is banned, or maybe they only censor whatever the state wants to censor...as long as there's 'at will employment' and businesses are free to censor content on their platforms, (which I approve of, personally), nobody should be able to complain about being silenced. Go start a facebook competitor, or your own company and compete (ironically that's what he did with Brave browser).
        rocqua 6y ago
        I am not talking about refusing service. I am talking about refusing being a customer. Big difference. We can force people to provide service to customers. We can't force customers to demand service from certain vendors. Especially with culture (comedians, pundits, writers).
  - Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
    Yeah. "I disapprove of what you say, so your employer must fire you and we'll destroy your career", so people know to keep their mouth shut about their views. Nothing totalitarian here, right.
    - gremlinsinc 6y ago
      If you had an employee sitting outside your office literally just saying all day to anyone walking by, my boss is a "effing <insert-racist-or-homophobic-slur>" would you allow them to continue working there? If not, are you not totalitarian?
- katktv 6y ago
  If Brendan Eich didn't want to be fired from Mozilla, he wouldn't donate towards the attacks on human fucking rights. Homophobia is unacceptable, and combatting it is not totalitarianism, especially because every single totalitarian country out there was and still is homophobic. Period.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
    > Homophobia is unacceptable, and combatting it is not totalitarianism <x> is unacceptable is a typical totalitarian pattern. In free societies all views deserve a place, even those that you personally don't like.
    - throwaway234101 6y ago
      This whole thread proves that free speech isn't possible in any society. The only question is who gets to decide what is verboten.
      - dschuessler 6y ago
        Interesting. The whole thread proves to me the exact opposite. That free speech is very alive since nothing here has been censored yet. The only way I can explain our disparate perceptions is that we're talking about entirely different things. By "free speech" I mean not being arrested or physically harmed for saying something. Is it possible that by "free speech" you in contrast mean being entitled to be invited, keeping your job, and/or remaining uncontradicted?
        throwaway234101 6y ago
        > By "free speech" I mean not being arrested or physically harmed for saying something. Go out in public and read random passages from the bible. See how long you go before being assaulted and/or arrested.
        josteink 6y ago
        I would have agreed to your statement until around now-ish when this entire discussion-tree got flagged, including my mostly factual root-comment. Around the same time the San Fransisco morning/lunch shift kicked in? You’re only allowed to have such “controversial” discussions here in European time-zones it seems ;)
josteink 6y ago
When you are not allowed to hold an opinion because it goes against the current SJW-held one-true-way and fired from a job you are otherwise excelling at (much more so than Baker does now), I would call that a SJW-witchhunt. You are free to hold your opinion though. That's a value I hold, unlike the SJW-crowd. Anyhow, my to not distract too much from the point at hand, my claim was that Mozilla had been increasingly politicized, and Eich's firing was a clearly in line with that.
- katktv 6y ago
  If you really want to talk about SJWs, go back to 4chan. Bigotry has no place in tech industry. Besides, your point is complete bollocks bc Google also funds said initiatives a lot.
  - me_me_me 6y ago
    there are issues with sjw crowd. Saying otherwise is simply going against reality. The most vocal and extreme left how have nothing to do but gather internet points will do anything to signal their virtue. For example, remember the head of team that landed probe on a comet. https://time.com/3589392/comet-shirt-storm/ https://time.com/3589392/comet-shirt-storm/ He was attack for a shirt that his wife got him. Do you considered that a justified attack on him?
    - katktv 6y ago
      Sexism is very clearly an issue in tech, and this particular thing was one of the manifestations of sexism in tech. I can't blame the people reacting to this when they face this kind of culture pretty much every day.
      - me_me_me 6y ago
        > Sexism is very clearly an issue in tech, In tech and almost every other aspect of life. > and this particular thing was one of the manifestations of sexism in tech How? He wore a shirt his wife bought him. He was never accused by his coworkers of anything. > I can't blame the people reacting to this when they face this kind of culture I can blame them. That was unjust character assassination. It was objectively wrong and UNjust that's the opposite of the second letter in sjw. And that's the core issue with this thinking. I am right even when I am wrong as long as I fell like i am fighting against evil.

by hazz99 6y ago

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago

One feature of totalitarism is suppression of dissenting political views. Somehow modern democracy (de)evolved from "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" to current cancel culture.

hazz99 6y ago
This has nothing to do with cancel culture, and everything to do with being a bad leader. > Somehow modern democracy (de)evolved from "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" to current cancel culture. Brendan has a right to express his opinion. Mozilla has a right to fire him for it. There's nothing totalitarian here.
- dogma1138 6y ago
  Would Mozilla be still in its right to fire them if the situation was reversed?
- josteink 6y ago
  They only did so after the SJW lynch-mob showed up on twitter and demanded him fired. Personally I'm not OK with rule by lynch-mob, and I hope you see how allowing such a culture to take hold may one day backfire, also on the things you hold dear.
  - rocqua 6y ago
    Thing is, if people really feel like "I can't support this company while X is there" are they just supposed to be quiet? Cancel culture is probably toxic to public discussion. But what is the alternative if people want to vote with their feet? If people want to make choices based on their morals, that seems awesome to me. It's only if people are bluffing things into being canceled that I see an issue here.
    - gremlinsinc 6y ago
      > Thing is, if people really feel like "I can't support this company while X is there" are they just supposed to be quiet? This! isn't that the whole point of capitalism? Love it or hate it, dollars = votes. Withholding it via firing or boycotting it's the same deal. The market decides what 'stands' and doesn't, what people can get away with and what they can't. At one point you could get away with refusing service to black people. Pressure from the markets and community changed that. Every change we've gotten is because someone fought back some way. You can't want unfettered capitalism (looking at the right/libertarians), and then cry when capitalist companies bow to pressure from the masses online and cancel shit. Privatize them, go dictator/socialist then the state/constitutions can say how a business is ran, and they maybe censorship is banned, or maybe they only censor whatever the state wants to censor...as long as there's 'at will employment' and businesses are free to censor content on their platforms, (which I approve of, personally), nobody should be able to complain about being silenced. Go start a facebook competitor, or your own company and compete (ironically that's what he did with Brave browser).
      - rocqua 6y ago
        I am not talking about refusing service. I am talking about refusing being a customer. Big difference. We can force people to provide service to customers. We can't force customers to demand service from certain vendors. Especially with culture (comedians, pundits, writers).
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  Yeah. "I disapprove of what you say, so your employer must fire you and we'll destroy your career", so people know to keep their mouth shut about their views. Nothing totalitarian here, right.
  - gremlinsinc 6y ago
    If you had an employee sitting outside your office literally just saying all day to anyone walking by, my boss is a "effing <insert-racist-or-homophobic-slur>" would you allow them to continue working there? If not, are you not totalitarian?
katktv 6y ago
If Brendan Eich didn't want to be fired from Mozilla, he wouldn't donate towards the attacks on human fucking rights. Homophobia is unacceptable, and combatting it is not totalitarianism, especially because every single totalitarian country out there was and still is homophobic. Period.
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  > Homophobia is unacceptable, and combatting it is not totalitarianism <x> is unacceptable is a typical totalitarian pattern. In free societies all views deserve a place, even those that you personally don't like.
  - throwaway234101 6y ago
    This whole thread proves that free speech isn't possible in any society. The only question is who gets to decide what is verboten.
    - dschuessler 6y ago
      Interesting. The whole thread proves to me the exact opposite. That free speech is very alive since nothing here has been censored yet. The only way I can explain our disparate perceptions is that we're talking about entirely different things. By "free speech" I mean not being arrested or physically harmed for saying something. Is it possible that by "free speech" you in contrast mean being entitled to be invited, keeping your job, and/or remaining uncontradicted?
      - throwaway234101 6y ago
        > By "free speech" I mean not being arrested or physically harmed for saying something. Go out in public and read random passages from the bible. See how long you go before being assaulted and/or arrested.
      - josteink 6y ago
        I would have agreed to your statement until around now-ish when this entire discussion-tree got flagged, including my mostly factual root-comment. Around the same time the San Fransisco morning/lunch shift kicked in? You’re only allowed to have such “controversial” discussions here in European time-zones it seems ;)

josteink 6y ago

When you are not allowed to hold an opinion because it goes against the current SJW-held one-true-way and fired from a job you are otherwise excelling at (much more so than Baker does now), I would call that a SJW-witchhunt. You are free to hold your opinion though. That's a value I hold, unlike the SJW-crowd. Anyhow, my to not distract too much from the point at hand, my claim was that Mozilla had been increasingly politicized, and Eich's firing was a clearly in line with that.

katktv 6y ago
If you really want to talk about SJWs, go back to 4chan. Bigotry has no place in tech industry. Besides, your point is complete bollocks bc Google also funds said initiatives a lot.
- me_me_me 6y ago
  there are issues with sjw crowd. Saying otherwise is simply going against reality. The most vocal and extreme left how have nothing to do but gather internet points will do anything to signal their virtue. For example, remember the head of team that landed probe on a comet. https://time.com/3589392/comet-shirt-storm/ https://time.com/3589392/comet-shirt-storm/ He was attack for a shirt that his wife got him. Do you considered that a justified attack on him?
  - katktv 6y ago
    Sexism is very clearly an issue in tech, and this particular thing was one of the manifestations of sexism in tech. I can't blame the people reacting to this when they face this kind of culture pretty much every day.
    - me_me_me 6y ago
      > Sexism is very clearly an issue in tech, In tech and almost every other aspect of life. > and this particular thing was one of the manifestations of sexism in tech How? He wore a shirt his wife bought him. He was never accused by his coworkers of anything. > I can't blame the people reacting to this when they face this kind of culture I can blame them. That was unjust character assassination. It was objectively wrong and UNjust that's the opposite of the second letter in sjw. And that's the core issue with this thinking. I am right even when I am wrong as long as I fell like i am fighting against evil.