6 ms·
There is a great supporting argument for keeping discussions of politics, race, religion, etc out of the workplace to begin with. It's not possible to call it
by eloff 6y ago
There is a great supporting argument for keeping discussions of politics, race, religion, etc out of the workplace to begin with.
It's not possible to call it from outside, but there was no actual racist behavior cited, apart from the list of funny customer names, which is not really racist (more culturalist - if that were a thing), but it is a terrible idea anyway.
It sounds like a bunch of people got upset and quit over white privilege and the usual similar nonsense. Good riddance, why would you want activist employees like that?
- fallenfromgrace 6y agoI thought so too, until I read the second (third?) article. Quite a few racist statements were made in the meeting itself and many employees mentioned that it was the meeting that convinced them to resign.
- eloff 6y agoLike what?
- fallenfromgrace 6y agoI was struck quite a bit by “I don't believe in a lot of the framing around implicit bias. I think a lot of this is actually racist.” The context it was said in made the statement rather jarring. I am all for their initial stance of "no politics" etc, but their all-hands was a face palm all around.
- eloff 6y agoI fully agree with that statement. A lot of the framing around implicit bias and white privilege is actually straight up generalizing about a group based on skin color. That's racist. This business that it's not racist if it's against white people is seriously wrong - and racist.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- dudul 6y agoHow is this statement racist?
- jariel 6y agoThat statement is not jarring. Employees calling the organization 'White Supremacist' is the thing that should be 'jarring' or at least controversial. There are arguments to be made, sure, but the language is fairly extremist.
- somedangedname 6y agoIt's jarring because you're hearing an opinion that challenges a fundamental part of your world view.
- DiNovi 6y agolike saying white supremacy doesnt exist in the united states
- tomschlick 6y agoSinger clarifies in the later follow up to say he was referring to the people at Basecamp, not in reference to the whole country. > To which Singer responded: “I said we have different ways of framing … If you want to debate whether it exists anywhere, then yeah. But not here at this company, not with the people I associate with.” Edit: to add quote
- DiNovi 6y agoYes it is a common tactic to back away from an initial claim and pivot after people call you out, but he already let the genie out the bottle.
- tomschlick 6y agoIts also common to not to explain things you think are obvious when initially talking but when someone asks you about it you clarify your position.
- ashtonkem 6y agoHe also has every single motive to lie here.
- tomschlick 6y agoOr he just thinks that the whole situation is ridiculous because there is zero evidence that we have seen relating any of this to white supremacy. Instead, those allegations are just brought out by people on the left anytime they want as a cudgel to stop all debate on a topic.
- 6y ago
- ashtonkem 6y agoI think announcing policies on the company blog without telling employees first is always going to go poorly. You don’t have to be an “activist” employee to feel slighted by that.
- eloff 6y agoYes, although that doesn't seem to be the proximate grievance leading to people quitting. Pretty dumb thing to do though.
- Igelau 6y agoYeah, a lot of us are missing the fact that there was real monetary value in these people going away, and so Basecamp paid them to do so.