3 ms·

I think this is missing the thrust of the issue which is that is, for some groups, certain kinds of politics invariably involve work and are a moral imperative.

I think this is missing the thrust of the issue which is that is, for some groups, certain kinds of politics invariably involve work and are a moral imperative. If this were about issues likee 'big vs. small government' then it wouldn't be a problem. But it's about political issues like 'diversity in the workplace' and 'Corporate support for Social Justice' (such as BLM) - as the big Elephant in the Room subject. So things like 'Thanksgiving is Covert White Supremacy' as part of your job training [1] and 'we must achieve certain diversity targets or we are racist'. That kind of stuff. There's a group (part of the 13%) that thinks unless you're on board all of that, you're a problem, basically it's a moral imperative and anything else is racism. There's other groups that believe in some of those things, but are open minded with respect to other's views. And of course a wide array of other opinions. I really don't believe that most other political subjects are entirely so sensitive. 'Privatization of Amtrack' or whatever is simply not going to engender in/out groups. Abortion, Gun Rights are probably trigger issues for some, but they are really easy to just avoid at the office. [1] https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/only-white-people-can-be-racist-inside-global-affairs-anti-racism-course-materials https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/only-white-people-can-b...

jl6 6y ago
It’s a valid point that some political issues are workplace-oriented, but in my organization they manifest as HR policies and are not up for personal debate round the water cooler.
KaiserPro 6y ago
> But it's about political issues like 'diversity in the workplace' and 'Corporate support for Social Justice' (such as BLM) but the problem with this view is that we are implementing a policy in a political way. There are many ways to argue for diversity that are either purely economic or practical. The issue here isn't the policy, its who and how its sold/pushed through. There are companies that are run by, or full of shouty political types. Part of the interview process is to sniff out that kind of company and avoid like the plague. The post you linked to is evidence of that. The other thing to mention is that US based companies are far more willing to let their works talk politics in the open. In the UK you are rightly looked at as suspect if you speak out on politics or religion.

jl6 6y ago

It’s a valid point that some political issues are workplace-oriented, but in my organization they manifest as HR policies and are not up for personal debate round the water cooler.

KaiserPro 6y ago

> But it's about political issues like 'diversity in the workplace' and 'Corporate support for Social Justice' (such as BLM) but the problem with this view is that we are implementing a policy in a political way. There are many ways to argue for diversity that are either purely economic or practical. The issue here isn't the policy, its who and how its sold/pushed through. There are companies that are run by, or full of shouty political types. Part of the interview process is to sniff out that kind of company and avoid like the plague. The post you linked to is evidence of that. The other thing to mention is that US based companies are far more willing to let their works talk politics in the open. In the UK you are rightly looked at as suspect if you speak out on politics or religion.