6 ms·

>You’re comment and a sibling both express that these messages are off-putting to international audiences? Non-American distinct from both of them here: They'r

>You’re comment and a sibling both express that these messages are off-putting to international audiences? Non-American distinct from both of them here: They're right. >black people definitely experience racism elsewhere Persuambly you think BLM is a generic "Racism Bad" message, so 3 things to say about this 1- BLM is not a generic "Racism Bad" message. It's the name of a movement whose leaders used donor money to accumulate personal wealth. It's the chant used by protestors who burned down homes and stole from people's business. It's the motto that people who write books to argue that disputing a racism accusation is a sign of guilt and fragility. I consider myself a non-racist, and this movement is not the kind of things I support. 2- The kinds of people and media outlets who support BLM tends to be selective and hypocritical. Wouldn't an honest person who shout "BLM" when a black man is killed by a police officer, wouldn't that person also be obligated to shout "White Lives Matter", WLM, when white innocents are killed by a black criminal because of their race ? This last event happens to be a real thing that actually happened (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waukesha_Christmas_parade_attack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waukesha_Christmas_parade_atta...), by a self-confessed black terrorist. Searching for "Black Supremacy", the only response in the first page is a short Wikipedia page, the rest is articles talking about White Supremacy instead. I have a feeling things are not so balanced here. 3- Even granting that BLM is a good moral cause to support, how is it relevant to a tech document ? Let us grant the following causes are all worthy of moral solidarity ["Climate Change", "China's Treatment of Uyghur Muslims", "Sexual Harrasment", "Child Abuse", "Animal Cruelty"]. All of the elements of this list are morally abhorrent things to me that I want to prevent or reverse. Now, where and when should I say this? at my home? to each and every one of my friends or family ? at work ? on the street ? Is there any time and place where I can safely lie down and not speak about atrocities, for once? >I’ve seen plenty of tech companies with Ukraine banners on their websites I'm very very annoyed by this too. Seeing Github and JetBrains issue a statment about this conflict is the most pathetic, hypocritical and forced thing I have seen in a very long while. Point 3 above applies to it straightforawrdly with no explanation, point 1 and 2 also apply as follows 1- Pro-Ukraine sentiment isn't a neutral "War Bad" message, it usually encodes within it pretty dubious and very partisan assertions, such as the belief that all Russians are to - and should be - blame and punish for Putin's action, as well as unhealthy and fanatic support for the Ukrainian government and its actions. 2- Tons of countries, everywhere and all the time, have experinced invasions and other illegal military actions. The example off the top of my head is Yemen. Children dying of starvation, civilaians bombed and hospitals wrecked, *Since 2015*. Did any of those companies issue statments then ? Let's forget about the past. Do we have a right to expect those companies to protest every single war and illegal military actions, regardless of the position of US politicians and US foreign policy, in the future?

skavi 4y ago
I do feel that BLM is a worthy cause to support. This is mainly because I feel the movement can be seen separately from any formal organizations or individual people. I understand how you may disagree. Regardless, the real disagreement seems to be in where it is appropriate to represent the movements you believe in. Even granting that a technical document page may not be the best place for such advertising, I still do not understand why the presence of these messages would offend an international audience. If they are truly irrelevant, then surely it should be at worst unsightly?
- Banana699 4y ago
  >then surely it should be at worst unsightly? What me and other people are trying to get across to you, is that you only feel this way because you support the cause. The practice of filling every place and institution with your partisan beliefs is a sign of disrespect, essentially a power move. "You're here to read up on an OS, but joke on you, you actually can't escape the all-pervasive hand of my religion. Here's some propaganda diet before you read anything". To know what that feels, imagine if every time a mainland Chinese scientist published an academic paper they were forced to write at the end "Long Live The CCP" with big bold letters. Or imagine if every time a Muslim scientist published a paper they must write "In The Name Of Allah, God Of All Creation" in the beginning. Etc... Can you see why this is ridiculous to a non-communist or a non-Muslim ? Why is this ridiculous belief-signalling an expression of power ? 2 reasons : 1- Like I said above, it asserts existence in a space where its competitors don't. No Christian, Jew or Hindu declares their religion in the academic papers they author, it feels fair that Muslims also shouldn't, it's like an unspoken agreement on keeping Academia free of an irrelevant controversial subject that gets people riled up and generates more heat than light. When Muslims (in the hypothetical world) violate this, it's a unilateral violation of the agreement that signals power and superiority. "Rules Don't Apply To Us". It's a fighting stance. In the concrete case we're discussing here, only progressive tech companies signal their beliefs in this vulgar way, no conservative tech firm have ever put "Blue Lives Matter" or "Make America Great Again" on their technical docs, although there are tens of millions of people who believe just as sincerly as you that those causes represent worthy and moral goals. The reason sane well-adjusted people refrain from expressing politics and religion in workplaces is because of common sense social protocols and unspoken consensus, when you break those, you're deliberately asserting power and inviting challenge. 2- It's probably forced. Just like the vast majority of Chinese scientists or Muslim scientists would probably do the above hypothetical signalling out of fear (of being labelled a traitor and a heretic, respectively), the vast majority of people in progressive-dominated social bubbles probably virtue-signal out of fear, rather than any geniune conviction. It's morally disgusting to force people to express beliefs they don't actually hold, or hold in lesser intensity than being forced to express. It's tyranny 101, straight from 1984.

skavi 4y ago

I do feel that BLM is a worthy cause to support. This is mainly because I feel the movement can be seen separately from any formal organizations or individual people. I understand how you may disagree. Regardless, the real disagreement seems to be in where it is appropriate to represent the movements you believe in. Even granting that a technical document page may not be the best place for such advertising, I still do not understand why the presence of these messages would offend an international audience. If they are truly irrelevant, then surely it should be at worst unsightly?

Banana699 4y ago
>then surely it should be at worst unsightly? What me and other people are trying to get across to you, is that you only feel this way because you support the cause. The practice of filling every place and institution with your partisan beliefs is a sign of disrespect, essentially a power move. "You're here to read up on an OS, but joke on you, you actually can't escape the all-pervasive hand of my religion. Here's some propaganda diet before you read anything". To know what that feels, imagine if every time a mainland Chinese scientist published an academic paper they were forced to write at the end "Long Live The CCP" with big bold letters. Or imagine if every time a Muslim scientist published a paper they must write "In The Name Of Allah, God Of All Creation" in the beginning. Etc... Can you see why this is ridiculous to a non-communist or a non-Muslim ? Why is this ridiculous belief-signalling an expression of power ? 2 reasons : 1- Like I said above, it asserts existence in a space where its competitors don't. No Christian, Jew or Hindu declares their religion in the academic papers they author, it feels fair that Muslims also shouldn't, it's like an unspoken agreement on keeping Academia free of an irrelevant controversial subject that gets people riled up and generates more heat than light. When Muslims (in the hypothetical world) violate this, it's a unilateral violation of the agreement that signals power and superiority. "Rules Don't Apply To Us". It's a fighting stance. In the concrete case we're discussing here, only progressive tech companies signal their beliefs in this vulgar way, no conservative tech firm have ever put "Blue Lives Matter" or "Make America Great Again" on their technical docs, although there are tens of millions of people who believe just as sincerly as you that those causes represent worthy and moral goals. The reason sane well-adjusted people refrain from expressing politics and religion in workplaces is because of common sense social protocols and unspoken consensus, when you break those, you're deliberately asserting power and inviting challenge. 2- It's probably forced. Just like the vast majority of Chinese scientists or Muslim scientists would probably do the above hypothetical signalling out of fear (of being labelled a traitor and a heretic, respectively), the vast majority of people in progressive-dominated social bubbles probably virtue-signal out of fear, rather than any geniune conviction. It's morally disgusting to force people to express beliefs they don't actually hold, or hold in lesser intensity than being forced to express. It's tyranny 101, straight from 1984.