5 ms·

Paul has said a lot of smart things, but this essay is hard to read. Paul seems to be complaining here that since becoming relevant/influential he's no longer

Paul has said a lot of smart things, but this essay is hard to read. Paul seems to be complaining here that since becoming relevant/influential he's no longer "allowed" to have "x-ist" beliefs. I mean, yeah... This is how the world works? When your job is digging holes alone in a field (or the office/academic equivalent), you can vomit whatever insane nonsense you want without consequence, because it doesn't affect anyone or anything. You don't matter. When your position gives you implicit or explicit power over a group of employees, founders, culture, etc; and that group either includes X's or people who care about X's, being "x-ist" has a material and unfair impact on those people. Asserting unrepentantly an "x-ist" opinion makes you _bad at that job_, and in fine capitalist tradition a better individual is found to replace you. Also I flat-out don't buy his assertion that it's impossible to be forgiven. Louis C.K. just won a Grammy, Chappelle just signed four more comedy specials for Netflix, who are these people forever out in the cold for speaking hard truths? Every time this comes up I wonder what these forbidden opinions he has which he dares not utter are.

jahnu 4y ago
Indeed. Once you have a megaphone in your hand new etiquette applies.
tehsauce 4y ago
Agreed. I’ve enjoyed a lot of his writing but this one is pretty embarrassing.
ploppyploppy 4y ago
Your viewpoint concerns me greatly. I am absolutely stunned that the HN community can support this surface-level analysis. What if a person finds themself in a position that gives them "implicit or explicit" power over a group of people (employees, students, whatever) and they use this position to utter "x-ist" beliefs that challenge the dogma of the day (which x-ism/x-phobia is a part of)? What if the very act of them speaking out perforates the layer of authoritarianism that governs and blinds most people such that they are enlightened as to the new religion that they've inherited whilst asleep? Would you support them then? > Asserting unrepentantly an "x-ist" opinion makes you _bad at that job_, and in fine capitalist tradition a better individual is found to replace you. Such a job entails many facets - being poor at one doesn't necessarily nullify your talents elsewhere (though granted it _could_). Who defines x-ism/x-phobia?
- DelaneyM 4y ago
  Nice hypothetical, can you come up with a real example of such a brave and controversial statement? Because I'm not sure this actually exists, most of the tube "x-ism" is also "being an asshole for no reason".
  - ploppyploppy 4y ago
    You're also operating with hypotheticals here, except you don't get challenged 'cause you're supporting the average viewpoint which is to by-proxy use the very power of x-isms to reject the main point without engaging in debate, i.e. you can get away at rejecting the article's premise because of potential "x-isms" they're guilty of and because they're x-isms you don't have to debate. I would direct you to Vaclav Havel's book "Power of the Powerless" - where dictatorship of the ritual is spelled out and how he amazingly identifies the traits of post-totalitarian societies. I believe heresy is one such trait. I would also add that my main issue is with this flippant attitude towards the greater issue: that heresy is alive and well and trumps everything from science, truth, evidence and context. Answer me: who defines x-ism/x-phobia? Remember if such a tool (heresy) exists and it is effective then your enemies get to use it too.
    - DelaneyM 4y ago
      I can name all kinds of sexist statements I've heard first-hand in just the past few months (none, I might add, which incurred any consequence). I bet you can too. Sexism, as an example of an "x-ism", is endemic in tech. If you must have an example let's just go with the Damore memo. You're the one saying that there are some sacred truths which cannot be uttered on pain of ostracism. Citation required, because I can't prove or demonstrate a negative. I would direct you to "Basic Logic", an introductory textbook by Raymond J. McCall.

jahnu 4y ago

Indeed. Once you have a megaphone in your hand new etiquette applies.

tehsauce 4y ago

Agreed. I’ve enjoyed a lot of his writing but this one is pretty embarrassing.

ploppyploppy 4y ago

Your viewpoint concerns me greatly. I am absolutely stunned that the HN community can support this surface-level analysis. What if a person finds themself in a position that gives them "implicit or explicit" power over a group of people (employees, students, whatever) and they use this position to utter "x-ist" beliefs that challenge the dogma of the day (which x-ism/x-phobia is a part of)? What if the very act of them speaking out perforates the layer of authoritarianism that governs and blinds most people such that they are enlightened as to the new religion that they've inherited whilst asleep? Would you support them then? > Asserting unrepentantly an "x-ist" opinion makes you _bad at that job_, and in fine capitalist tradition a better individual is found to replace you. Such a job entails many facets - being poor at one doesn't necessarily nullify your talents elsewhere (though granted it _could_). Who defines x-ism/x-phobia?

DelaneyM 4y ago
Nice hypothetical, can you come up with a real example of such a brave and controversial statement? Because I'm not sure this actually exists, most of the tube "x-ism" is also "being an asshole for no reason".
- ploppyploppy 4y ago
  You're also operating with hypotheticals here, except you don't get challenged 'cause you're supporting the average viewpoint which is to by-proxy use the very power of x-isms to reject the main point without engaging in debate, i.e. you can get away at rejecting the article's premise because of potential "x-isms" they're guilty of and because they're x-isms you don't have to debate. I would direct you to Vaclav Havel's book "Power of the Powerless" - where dictatorship of the ritual is spelled out and how he amazingly identifies the traits of post-totalitarian societies. I believe heresy is one such trait. I would also add that my main issue is with this flippant attitude towards the greater issue: that heresy is alive and well and trumps everything from science, truth, evidence and context. Answer me: who defines x-ism/x-phobia? Remember if such a tool (heresy) exists and it is effective then your enemies get to use it too.
  - DelaneyM 4y ago
    I can name all kinds of sexist statements I've heard first-hand in just the past few months (none, I might add, which incurred any consequence). I bet you can too. Sexism, as an example of an "x-ism", is endemic in tech. If you must have an example let's just go with the Damore memo. You're the one saying that there are some sacred truths which cannot be uttered on pain of ostracism. Citation required, because I can't prove or demonstrate a negative. I would direct you to "Basic Logic", an introductory textbook by Raymond J. McCall.