4 ms·

This is likely an example why it may not always be a great idea to discuss politics at work. I know a lot of us have strong personal opinions on a lot of subjec

This is likely an example why it may not always be a great idea to discuss politics at work. I know a lot of us have strong personal opinions on a lot of subjects, but making sure everyone on my team aligns with my beliefs is likely not conducive to teamwork. Quite the opposite. If I was not an IC now, I would definitely be trying to cut discussions like that in a bud.

rob74 4y ago
Except racism (and "caste-based discrimination" is also racism) shouldn't be considered "politics", everybody should be able to agree that it doesn't have a place in a modern company.
- zo1 4y ago
  I'd posit that 99.999% of people agree racism is bad. It's mostly when the definition gets muddied and expanded that people start disagreeing and it becomes political and touchy.
  - knorker 4y ago
    I don't think it's a matter of definition. Unless you mean "it's not racism when I say it. When I say it it's just a fact". Whether they use the N word, or saying "being on time" is "whiteness", racism is always defined as "not what I'm doing". Actually the only real definition of racism I would say is "mentioning race in any way, except the way I do it". For your 99.999%, I would say that WAY more than one in a hundred thousand would overtly say that their group (race, religion, skin color, gender) is "better" than another. Especially as you leave western countries. Though in some countries their racism doesn't even place themselves at the top. 27% of Americans say that homeopathy is an effective treatement. I've never met anyone who would admit to this. I know someone who believes in crystals and fortune tellers though. I don't know how many people are pro-racism, but it's not three orders of magnitude less than people who believe in the power of nothing.
    - aabceh 4y ago
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
      I think the problem is - and that is likely what OP was referring to - that if everything is racism then nothing is racism. And if being on time is racist, I guess everything already is racist. It is an odd frame of mind. >>> For your 99.999%, I would say that WAY more than one in a hundred thousand would overtly say that their group (race, religion, skin color, gender) is "better" than another. Especially as you leave western countries. Is it possible you are conflating racism with xenophobia ( which has slightly expanded to include foreigners )?
      - knorker 4y ago
        No, I'm not conflating. Especially when referring to those (like I mentioned) who don't place themselves at the top. That's the opposite of xenophobia, if anything. I'm saying one in a hundred thousand is too few. The US has more than 3000 people who judge even by phrenology, I'm sure.
        A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
        I don't want to be glib here, but it is very much applicable. Why is that relevant to the discussion?
  - Crabber 4y ago
- seneca 4y ago
  "Except my special bugbear is special and should be exempt from basic social norms. Everyone should have to agree with me". The issue is that any and everything can be claimed to be racist, and therefore transferred to your special pre-political exemption.
  - NoGravitas 4y ago
    Apart from the morality of the situation, the fact is that racial discrimination in the workplace is illegal in the US (and rightly so, in my opinion). Whether caste discrimination is a form of racial discrimination is the subject of current litigation in California. Given that there are legal requirements the company needs to stay in compliance with, this is squarely outside of "politics at work".
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
      This is likely the only reasonable counter to my opinion so far. That said, is caste of a racial nature? To my understanding it really more of a social construct more tied to ethnicity.
      - NoGravitas 4y ago
        To be clear, race is also socially constructed; they're different cultures' ways of stratifying social categories. That said, all that matters for the law in this case is what the courts say.
        A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
        Eh, I hate this conversation. Maybe? If we follow that thread, everything is a social construct. It gets silly fast. Now, if were to look for a biological definition from Webster(1), race would be defined as: a group within a species that is distinguishable (as morphologically, genetically, or behaviorally) from others of the same species How is skin color not a distinguishable trait? Now.. it might not be politically polite thing to say, but it does not change the outcome here. 1:https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/race https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/race
- yakshaving_jgt 4y ago
  According to people like Robin DiAngelo, white people are inherently racist, as she wrote in her book White Fragility. It’s difficult to say that we can all agree to not be racist when some ideologues from whom’s political ideas companies base DEI initiatives on claim that racism is an immutable characteristic that many of us are born with.
  - booleandilemma 4y ago
    It sounds like Robin DiAngelo is inherently racist.
    - usrn 4y ago
      These people often use Trotsky's definition of racism which means they can't be racist towards White people. We should all stop using the word because it means something different to extremists. "Racial bigotry" makes much more sense.
    - rob74 4y ago
      I would say anyone who makes such broad statements about groups of people is at least guilty of bigotry, yes...
- Consultant32452 4y ago
  Having public messaging about negative social behavior often results in more of the negative behavior. Studies suggest lots of media about school shootings results in more school shootings. Similarly, messaging about getting help to reduce self-harm results in more self-harm. DARE resulted in no reductions in drug use. If the people creating these programs/talks don't understand this, they don't deserve the platform. And if they do understand it, they are evil and intentionally trying to make race/bigotry tensions worse. In cases such as this where the relevant psychology of the issue is essential to the career, I tend to assume the worst of anyone doing it.
  - x86_64Ubuntu 4y ago
    So the problem shouldn't be discussed? So for security vulnerabilities, disclosing them allows them to be exploited. So 0-days and their corresponding patches shouldn't be discussed or released?
    - Consultant32452 4y ago
      A thoughtful person might change their behavior once they learn that their behavior is getting the opposite of the result they intended.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  Why is it an exception and why is it not politics? Can you define politics and tell me why "cast-based discrimination" does not overlap with that definition?
gman83 4y ago
I think that discussing caste-based discrimination is great for a western company to do. Especially one with a lot of Indian workers. Most western workers/managers have little understanding of this topic, and will probably miss it if a coworker is being discriminated against because of their caste. Seems like a no-brainer to me.
HelloMcFly 4y ago
> This is likely an example why it may not always be a great idea to discuss politics at work. If you're seeing discrimination in the workplace then it's no longer about politics, it's about the workplace and professionalism among staff.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  No. Everything is politics. You just happen to be too close and emotionally invested to see it as such. It is fine to hold strong opinions and consider some items 'obvious' or even 'inalienable', but pretending those are all not just a temporary set of values we agreed on as a society is silly. edit: Even saying 'I am apolitical' is a political statement.
  - HelloMcFly 4y ago
    Everything may have a political lens with which it can be viewed, but that doesn't make literally everything "political" in the typical usage of the word. Are all workplace conflicts political? Is all unethical workplace behavior political? Is failure to follow IT security guidelines in the workplace political? It's possible to confidently answer "yes" to all of these questions with the right logical contortions, but at that point we'll have reached reductio ad absurdum. When you manage a group of people that have to work together while trying to maximize workplace outcomes within existing legal framework, organizations have a professional motivation to cover topics like workplace fairness, bias, respectful behavior, etc.
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
      We are actually in agreement. What we don't seem to agree on is that easiest way for a corporations to avoid this particular pitfall is by not being anywhere near it. Especially in 2022.
      - HelloMcFly 4y ago
        > What we don't seem to agree on is that easiest way for a corporations to avoid this particular pitfall is by not being anywhere near it. I think we disagree in that I don't believe many of these issues can be avoided. If you're seeing caste-based discrimination in your workplace (for instance, just to use an issue that isn't legally mandated to address), any attempt to avoid it is a tacit endorsement of the practice. There are no sidelines upon which to stand.
throw93 4y ago
How is this political? This is standard DEI stuff.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  DEI (and opposition to it) is quite political.

rob74 4y ago

Except racism (and "caste-based discrimination" is also racism) shouldn't be considered "politics", everybody should be able to agree that it doesn't have a place in a modern company.

zo1 4y ago
I'd posit that 99.999% of people agree racism is bad. It's mostly when the definition gets muddied and expanded that people start disagreeing and it becomes political and touchy.
- knorker 4y ago
  I don't think it's a matter of definition. Unless you mean "it's not racism when I say it. When I say it it's just a fact". Whether they use the N word, or saying "being on time" is "whiteness", racism is always defined as "not what I'm doing". Actually the only real definition of racism I would say is "mentioning race in any way, except the way I do it". For your 99.999%, I would say that WAY more than one in a hundred thousand would overtly say that their group (race, religion, skin color, gender) is "better" than another. Especially as you leave western countries. Though in some countries their racism doesn't even place themselves at the top. 27% of Americans say that homeopathy is an effective treatement. I've never met anyone who would admit to this. I know someone who believes in crystals and fortune tellers though. I don't know how many people are pro-racism, but it's not three orders of magnitude less than people who believe in the power of nothing.
  - aabceh 4y ago
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    I think the problem is - and that is likely what OP was referring to - that if everything is racism then nothing is racism. And if being on time is racist, I guess everything already is racist. It is an odd frame of mind. >>> For your 99.999%, I would say that WAY more than one in a hundred thousand would overtly say that their group (race, religion, skin color, gender) is "better" than another. Especially as you leave western countries. Is it possible you are conflating racism with xenophobia ( which has slightly expanded to include foreigners )?
    - knorker 4y ago
      No, I'm not conflating. Especially when referring to those (like I mentioned) who don't place themselves at the top. That's the opposite of xenophobia, if anything. I'm saying one in a hundred thousand is too few. The US has more than 3000 people who judge even by phrenology, I'm sure.
      - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
        I don't want to be glib here, but it is very much applicable. Why is that relevant to the discussion?
- Crabber 4y ago
seneca 4y ago
"Except my special bugbear is special and should be exempt from basic social norms. Everyone should have to agree with me". The issue is that any and everything can be claimed to be racist, and therefore transferred to your special pre-political exemption.
- NoGravitas 4y ago
  Apart from the morality of the situation, the fact is that racial discrimination in the workplace is illegal in the US (and rightly so, in my opinion). Whether caste discrimination is a form of racial discrimination is the subject of current litigation in California. Given that there are legal requirements the company needs to stay in compliance with, this is squarely outside of "politics at work".
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    This is likely the only reasonable counter to my opinion so far. That said, is caste of a racial nature? To my understanding it really more of a social construct more tied to ethnicity.
    - NoGravitas 4y ago
      To be clear, race is also socially constructed; they're different cultures' ways of stratifying social categories. That said, all that matters for the law in this case is what the courts say.
      - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
        Eh, I hate this conversation. Maybe? If we follow that thread, everything is a social construct. It gets silly fast. Now, if were to look for a biological definition from Webster(1), race would be defined as: a group within a species that is distinguishable (as morphologically, genetically, or behaviorally) from others of the same species How is skin color not a distinguishable trait? Now.. it might not be politically polite thing to say, but it does not change the outcome here. 1:https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/race https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/race
yakshaving_jgt 4y ago
According to people like Robin DiAngelo, white people are inherently racist, as she wrote in her book White Fragility. It’s difficult to say that we can all agree to not be racist when some ideologues from whom’s political ideas companies base DEI initiatives on claim that racism is an immutable characteristic that many of us are born with.
- booleandilemma 4y ago
  It sounds like Robin DiAngelo is inherently racist.
  - usrn 4y ago
    These people often use Trotsky's definition of racism which means they can't be racist towards White people. We should all stop using the word because it means something different to extremists. "Racial bigotry" makes much more sense.
  - rob74 4y ago
    I would say anyone who makes such broad statements about groups of people is at least guilty of bigotry, yes...
Consultant32452 4y ago
Having public messaging about negative social behavior often results in more of the negative behavior. Studies suggest lots of media about school shootings results in more school shootings. Similarly, messaging about getting help to reduce self-harm results in more self-harm. DARE resulted in no reductions in drug use. If the people creating these programs/talks don't understand this, they don't deserve the platform. And if they do understand it, they are evil and intentionally trying to make race/bigotry tensions worse. In cases such as this where the relevant psychology of the issue is essential to the career, I tend to assume the worst of anyone doing it.
- x86_64Ubuntu 4y ago
  So the problem shouldn't be discussed? So for security vulnerabilities, disclosing them allows them to be exploited. So 0-days and their corresponding patches shouldn't be discussed or released?
  - Consultant32452 4y ago
    A thoughtful person might change their behavior once they learn that their behavior is getting the opposite of the result they intended.
A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
Why is it an exception and why is it not politics? Can you define politics and tell me why "cast-based discrimination" does not overlap with that definition?

gman83 4y ago

I think that discussing caste-based discrimination is great for a western company to do. Especially one with a lot of Indian workers. Most western workers/managers have little understanding of this topic, and will probably miss it if a coworker is being discriminated against because of their caste. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

HelloMcFly 4y ago

> This is likely an example why it may not always be a great idea to discuss politics at work. If you're seeing discrimination in the workplace then it's no longer about politics, it's about the workplace and professionalism among staff.

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
No. Everything is politics. You just happen to be too close and emotionally invested to see it as such. It is fine to hold strong opinions and consider some items 'obvious' or even 'inalienable', but pretending those are all not just a temporary set of values we agreed on as a society is silly. edit: Even saying 'I am apolitical' is a political statement.
- HelloMcFly 4y ago
  Everything may have a political lens with which it can be viewed, but that doesn't make literally everything "political" in the typical usage of the word. Are all workplace conflicts political? Is all unethical workplace behavior political? Is failure to follow IT security guidelines in the workplace political? It's possible to confidently answer "yes" to all of these questions with the right logical contortions, but at that point we'll have reached reductio ad absurdum. When you manage a group of people that have to work together while trying to maximize workplace outcomes within existing legal framework, organizations have a professional motivation to cover topics like workplace fairness, bias, respectful behavior, etc.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    We are actually in agreement. What we don't seem to agree on is that easiest way for a corporations to avoid this particular pitfall is by not being anywhere near it. Especially in 2022.
    - HelloMcFly 4y ago
      > What we don't seem to agree on is that easiest way for a corporations to avoid this particular pitfall is by not being anywhere near it. I think we disagree in that I don't believe many of these issues can be avoided. If you're seeing caste-based discrimination in your workplace (for instance, just to use an issue that isn't legally mandated to address), any attempt to avoid it is a tacit endorsement of the practice. There are no sidelines upon which to stand.

throw93 4y ago

How is this political? This is standard DEI stuff.

dragonwriter 4y ago
DEI (and opposition to it) is quite political.