4 ms·

Free speech only extends in dealings with the government. Free speech doesn’t grant you the right to interrupt business events without repercussions

mmh0000 1y ago
Yep! And sure in the 1700's when kings ruled the world that was great! But in the 2000's when CEOs rule the world, we may need to think about extending free speech protections a bit.
- jmye 1y ago
  Why should you have the right to disrupt a company meeting? Do I have the unmitigated right to come into your sprint planning and scream at you? Does no one have the right to choose not to associate with you if you make yourself unpleasant to be around, or do we all just have to suffer the biggest fool, always and all the time? Why is your, or this engineer’s speech, more worth protecting than mine, my boss’s, or Nadella’s? So tired of this nonsense. I don’t want to hear about your shitty politics at work. If you don’t like what your company is doing, quit and do something else.
  - TheNewsIsHere 1y ago
    You are highlighting the fundamental tension at the center of this continuing issue. This isn’t unique to the genocide of Palestinians. This is happening repeatedly in multiple contexts across essentially all very large organizations. It is, I submit, a manifestation of collectivist actions. Usually that doesn’t intersect politics inside a business, but as more and more horrific things are being perpetrated or aided by the businesses that employ politically interested people, it’s happening more and more.
    - nh23423fefe 1y ago
      Ineffective loners screaming at CEOs accomplishes nothing. These are a bunch of mash potato throwers, traffic blockers, and paint can dumpers. These tantrums are garbage and the only defense is fake moralizing and weird obfuscated language like yours. Meanwhile plain-spoken people think this behavior sucks.
dissent 1y ago
That's an American legal distinction. Free Speech is a value
- TheNewsIsHere 1y ago
  I posit that it’s also a choice. You can choose to curtail your speech or scream it from the rooftops, at any given time. You might sign some kind of agreement with a non-disparagement clause and then decide that you wish to speak out in ways that break that agreement.
burnt-resistor 1y ago
The speech was free of government interference, the private consequences are the price of and necessity of moral courage. Otherwise, it wouldn't be courageous.
catlifeonmars 1y ago
While that is technically true, the extent to which that distinction matters is highly variable. There’s nothing fundamentally different about dissenting in a public or private space, it’s just a matter of degrees. But I’ll grant you that every action has repercussions and absolutely no one should be surprised about the repercussions this employee faced.

mmh0000 1y ago

Yep! And sure in the 1700's when kings ruled the world that was great! But in the 2000's when CEOs rule the world, we may need to think about extending free speech protections a bit.

jmye 1y ago
Why should you have the right to disrupt a company meeting? Do I have the unmitigated right to come into your sprint planning and scream at you? Does no one have the right to choose not to associate with you if you make yourself unpleasant to be around, or do we all just have to suffer the biggest fool, always and all the time? Why is your, or this engineer’s speech, more worth protecting than mine, my boss’s, or Nadella’s? So tired of this nonsense. I don’t want to hear about your shitty politics at work. If you don’t like what your company is doing, quit and do something else.
- TheNewsIsHere 1y ago
  You are highlighting the fundamental tension at the center of this continuing issue. This isn’t unique to the genocide of Palestinians. This is happening repeatedly in multiple contexts across essentially all very large organizations. It is, I submit, a manifestation of collectivist actions. Usually that doesn’t intersect politics inside a business, but as more and more horrific things are being perpetrated or aided by the businesses that employ politically interested people, it’s happening more and more.
  - nh23423fefe 1y ago
    Ineffective loners screaming at CEOs accomplishes nothing. These are a bunch of mash potato throwers, traffic blockers, and paint can dumpers. These tantrums are garbage and the only defense is fake moralizing and weird obfuscated language like yours. Meanwhile plain-spoken people think this behavior sucks.

dissent 1y ago

That's an American legal distinction. Free Speech is a value

TheNewsIsHere 1y ago
I posit that it’s also a choice. You can choose to curtail your speech or scream it from the rooftops, at any given time. You might sign some kind of agreement with a non-disparagement clause and then decide that you wish to speak out in ways that break that agreement.

burnt-resistor 1y ago

The speech was free of government interference, the private consequences are the price of and necessity of moral courage. Otherwise, it wouldn't be courageous.

catlifeonmars 1y ago

While that is technically true, the extent to which that distinction matters is highly variable. There’s nothing fundamentally different about dissenting in a public or private space, it’s just a matter of degrees. But I’ll grant you that every action has repercussions and absolutely no one should be surprised about the repercussions this employee faced.