4 ms·

"A time comes when silence is betrayal." This is classical us vs them rhetoric, and I don't like to be dragged into this trap, especially at a company level.

sascha_sl 6y ago
That's not the context of the article, "silencing" is used in the "actively silencing" sense. It's not about a bystander not getting involved.
- stephc_int13 6y ago
  It is about talking politics at work. From what I understand. I strongly agree with Basecamp here.
  - sascha_sl 6y ago
    Discussing what the company's policy on hate speech, diversity and inclusion should be might be politics, but it's not the "spitting on MAGA hats" kind of politics people on twitter seem to think it is. I think it's work relevant. Gauging from votes, most people in this thread seem to see themselves more as mercenaries with no personal investment in their workplace (or they are not negatively affected by their lacking work culture, uh, privilege) than anything else, and that's fine, but don't assume someone wouldn't find personal fulfillment in making their workplace better.
    - stephc_int13 6y ago
      Would you refuse to work with a colleague because he voted for the other side? This is discrimination and this is obviously illegal, but this is a side effect of talking politics at work.
      - RhysU 6y ago
        I don't think this is a good idea but I don't see how it is illegal: "Alice, pick up the ticket for Bob." "No, Bob voted for X!" Then, sometime later, Alice is fined and/or sent to jail.
      - sascha_sl 6y ago
        Sorry for the late reply, HN "rate limits" got me. The short answer is that I pick my workplace based on culture. I have to. I am a very obvious queer looking person, so about half to a third of my interviews go at least slightly sour as soon as they start. It's a good filter in a way. The job I had while coming out turned out not to be so great, lots of rumors and hot takes and bad jokes about me going around. I don't need that sort of constant negativity in my life. (Also, I'm not exactly sure how I'd define "the other side", since I'm not in the US. It's more subtle here.)
    - luckylion 6y ago
      > don't assume someone wouldn't find personal fulfillment in making their workplace better That does sound like it, to be honest. Some people seek fulfillment by changing their workplaces after their ideals, other people want to get stuff done. I find it amazing that they launch new products despite having people who seem to be professional issue-seekers and problem-finders. I've worked along side similar people while working with unions and it was so unbelievably exhausting how slow they were in literally everything.
  - valiant55 6y ago
    I mean it looks like its more than that to me. What do you do when politics comes knocking at your door but you've banned political discussion? Reading between the lines it sounds like there might have been planning of the Jan 6th riot on their platform. How do you not discuss politics in that situation?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  It's the same underlying problem. In order to effectively work with other people, you have to be able and willing to lose arguments. The author's strategy of being eternally bitter, and trying to revive the argument whenever you see a good opening, is fundamentally at odds with a happy, inclusive work environment.
throwawaysea 6y ago
It's incredibly self-serving - this rhetoric is intended to legitimize and allow one side's speech and actions while suppressing the other side. Committed activists and partisans first proclaim "your speech is violence" as they seek to censor/deplatform/demonetize anyone who opposes their views. Then they proclaim "your silence is violence", and demand you (or the company you work for) exhibit their political views. Finally, they also proclaim "our violence is speech" as they participate in large-scale rioting and property damage but then try to cast those actions as legitimate "civil disobedience". It's just one big bag of gaslighting, broken logic, and arbitrary redefinition of common language.
- valiant55 6y ago
  It looks like you're the one doing the gaslighting. Your conflating multiple different events / movements and your whole comment comes off as a whinny conservative who just wants to say the n-word.
  - melff 6y ago
    "conflating" multiple events/movements is valid in this case because they are just examples for different stages/levels of us vs them mentality. Even if this "conflating" was a problem there is no gas lighting, inappropriate examples/ways-of-saying-it at best. Ps. nobody will be impressed by Ad hominems, we are not on reddit.
- ixacto 6y ago
  Exactly. I find it this ironic it is the same phrase that Bush used, and now the left has taken it over too https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_are_either_with_us,_or_against_us https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_are_either_with_us,_or_a.... Really this whole controversy is asking for their political views to be the only ones discussed at work, what happens when someone from a more conservative background or country voices their views? IMO really don’t want to talk politics at work it will just lead to problems. Also SJW is not a protected class.

sascha_sl 6y ago

That's not the context of the article, "silencing" is used in the "actively silencing" sense. It's not about a bystander not getting involved.

stephc_int13 6y ago
It is about talking politics at work. From what I understand. I strongly agree with Basecamp here.
- sascha_sl 6y ago
  Discussing what the company's policy on hate speech, diversity and inclusion should be might be politics, but it's not the "spitting on MAGA hats" kind of politics people on twitter seem to think it is. I think it's work relevant. Gauging from votes, most people in this thread seem to see themselves more as mercenaries with no personal investment in their workplace (or they are not negatively affected by their lacking work culture, uh, privilege) than anything else, and that's fine, but don't assume someone wouldn't find personal fulfillment in making their workplace better.
  - stephc_int13 6y ago
    Would you refuse to work with a colleague because he voted for the other side? This is discrimination and this is obviously illegal, but this is a side effect of talking politics at work.
    - RhysU 6y ago
      I don't think this is a good idea but I don't see how it is illegal: "Alice, pick up the ticket for Bob." "No, Bob voted for X!" Then, sometime later, Alice is fined and/or sent to jail.
    - sascha_sl 6y ago
      Sorry for the late reply, HN "rate limits" got me. The short answer is that I pick my workplace based on culture. I have to. I am a very obvious queer looking person, so about half to a third of my interviews go at least slightly sour as soon as they start. It's a good filter in a way. The job I had while coming out turned out not to be so great, lots of rumors and hot takes and bad jokes about me going around. I don't need that sort of constant negativity in my life. (Also, I'm not exactly sure how I'd define "the other side", since I'm not in the US. It's more subtle here.)
  - luckylion 6y ago
    > don't assume someone wouldn't find personal fulfillment in making their workplace better That does sound like it, to be honest. Some people seek fulfillment by changing their workplaces after their ideals, other people want to get stuff done. I find it amazing that they launch new products despite having people who seem to be professional issue-seekers and problem-finders. I've worked along side similar people while working with unions and it was so unbelievably exhausting how slow they were in literally everything.
- valiant55 6y ago
  I mean it looks like its more than that to me. What do you do when politics comes knocking at your door but you've banned political discussion? Reading between the lines it sounds like there might have been planning of the Jan 6th riot on their platform. How do you not discuss politics in that situation?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
It's the same underlying problem. In order to effectively work with other people, you have to be able and willing to lose arguments. The author's strategy of being eternally bitter, and trying to revive the argument whenever you see a good opening, is fundamentally at odds with a happy, inclusive work environment.

throwawaysea 6y ago

It's incredibly self-serving - this rhetoric is intended to legitimize and allow one side's speech and actions while suppressing the other side. Committed activists and partisans first proclaim "your speech is violence" as they seek to censor/deplatform/demonetize anyone who opposes their views. Then they proclaim "your silence is violence", and demand you (or the company you work for) exhibit their political views. Finally, they also proclaim "our violence is speech" as they participate in large-scale rioting and property damage but then try to cast those actions as legitimate "civil disobedience". It's just one big bag of gaslighting, broken logic, and arbitrary redefinition of common language.

valiant55 6y ago
It looks like you're the one doing the gaslighting. Your conflating multiple different events / movements and your whole comment comes off as a whinny conservative who just wants to say the n-word.
- melff 6y ago
  "conflating" multiple events/movements is valid in this case because they are just examples for different stages/levels of us vs them mentality. Even if this "conflating" was a problem there is no gas lighting, inappropriate examples/ways-of-saying-it at best. Ps. nobody will be impressed by Ad hominems, we are not on reddit.
ixacto 6y ago
Exactly. I find it this ironic it is the same phrase that Bush used, and now the left has taken it over too https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_are_either_with_us,_or_against_us https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_are_either_with_us,_or_a.... Really this whole controversy is asking for their political views to be the only ones discussed at work, what happens when someone from a more conservative background or country voices their views? IMO really don’t want to talk politics at work it will just lead to problems. Also SJW is not a protected class.