Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by martyb on Friday August 11 2017, @02:10PM   Printer-friendly
from the hurry-up-and-stop dept.

Google is struggling to discuss the recent diversity memo controversy internally:

Google's CEO, Sundar Pichai, canceled a scheduled all-hands staff meeting—moments before it was scheduled to begin—meant to address concerns over a controversial essay published by former employee James Damore.

In an email to staff, Pichai explained that questions from employees had been leaked and that, in some cases, specific employees' identities were revealed, exposing them to harassment and threats. Instead of today's large-scale meeting, which was to be livestreamed to Google's 60,000 employees worldwide, smaller groups will meet sometime in the future.

"We had hoped to have a frank open discussion today as we always do to bring us together and move forward. But our Dory questions appeared externally this afternoon, and on some websites Googlers are now being named personally," Pichai said in the email.

Also at CNET.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 11 2017, @05:27PM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 11 2017, @05:27PM (#552446)

    Is it just me, or does "cultural appropriation" equate to plain racism. As in "You are not this color, so you can't do this!", "Christmas for Christians only, no Jews allowed!" or "only _real_ Americans are allowed to eat a hamburger!"

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Friday August 11 2017, @07:51PM (3 children)

    by Arik (4543) on Friday August 11 2017, @07:51PM (#552538) Journal
    "Is it just me, or does "cultural appropriation" equate to plain racism. As in "You are not this color, so you can't do this!", "Christmas for Christians only, no Jews allowed!" or "only _real_ Americans are allowed to eat a hamburger!""

    I think you've got the thrust of it, yeah.

    The 'social justice' movement is the left wing of a resurgent racism/communitarianism impulse, with the right wing of course being the WN/neocon/alt-right loons.

    For instance collectively they seem to genuinely favor e.g. segregation. The motivation and justifications may be very different but there's more than a bit of agreement in there too. Both see the group assignment as the most important thing about human beings, far more important than their individual differences, even if they could never agree on which groups 'really exist.' (Hint, none of them.)

    "Social justice" is a code, it's the basic jumping-off point for the wholesale reforming of language so that morality may be inverted without setting off the normal alarm-bells in the super-ego.

    Justice is individual. "Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers" nor "shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

    "Social justice" is the reverse of justice. It doesn't start with an individual who has certain rights and the responsibility to respect the rights of others. It starts with a series of bins, labeled with 'identities.' Depending on the individual there may be many or few bins, the left wing tendency is to splinter them into as many as possible while the right wing impulse is to consolidate into a handful of larger streams, but in many cases they still overlap, with for instance both sides seemingly swallowing the essence of traditional american 'racial' mirages; with black and white in center stage overshadowing all else. When deciding who should be hired or fired, who should be admitted or denied entry, who should be allowed to rent and who should be turned away, in all these things and more both of these groups agree that *which bin* they have sorted you into ahead of time not only is but *should be* an important factor, quite possibly the most important factor, in the outcome.

    One might say that there's just no justice in 'social justice.'
    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 11 2017, @10:29PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 11 2017, @10:29PM (#552623)

      It is enlightening to read the conservative perspective, no matter how wrong it is. Gotta be able to understand where these people are coming from if we are to have any chance of helping them.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday August 12 2017, @05:17PM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday August 12 2017, @05:17PM (#552904) Journal
        Well, don't hold back then. Give us your conservative perspective, no matter how wrong it is, so that we may be enlightened.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @01:24AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @01:24AM (#552673)

      Parent is so right.
      The racist non-white supremacists HATE race mixing because the sole source of their identity, their race, is diluted and becomes one with the hated "other."
      Segregation provides their lives with meaning. They are the other side of the coin opposite the white supremacists.

      Of course, if they give in to the forbidden temptation and mix with white people, they cannot bear to admit their kids are part white. They will call their kids "black", "of color", or what have you.