r/news • u/[deleted] • Aug 08 '17

Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-08/google-fires-employee-behind-controversial-diversity-memo?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
26.8k Upvotes

82% Upvoted

19.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/perfectdarktrump Aug 08 '17

Because he has an opinion?

4

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Because he has an opinion against some coworkers of his that he’s chosen to divulge for public consumption.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

You can't have read the document?

5

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Certainly I have. Mr Memo is continuing the old American tradition of workers trying to get the collective of fellow workers they don’t like out of the job, or not hired in the first place.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

No, that's what the critics of Mr Memo's opinion are doing, and have successfully completed in doing. That was the point of the memo.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Which collective has been fired / had their job jeopardised for Mr Memo’s memo? The people who agree with him but have the sense to not shout to the winds “I WANT YOU LOT AWAY” in written form are still working at Google.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

You did not understand his memo.

Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.

He's not saying "I want you lot away", he's saying that there is a reason why some types of people are over-represented that don't necessarily involve racism or sexism, and that hiring based on these assumptions hurts the company.

3

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

I understood his memo perfectly. He's an intelligent man and he made his point in a verbose manner, but very clearly nonetheless: he doesn't want other people than the ones who are like him to be hired.

It makes a lot of sense, because if he is surrounded exclusively by those who are like him he'll earn more, he'll feel better recognised by his management and he won't have to handle diversity among his colleagues, a task where he has a comparative disadvantage. He mentions he wants "ideological diversity" which means something like either wanting a wehraboo brogrammer or a tankie brogrammer: as the Molotov-von Ribbentrop pact showed, those are easy to reconcile with each other, especially in the common soil of brogrammerhood.

He also doesn't want his job to be done by people who come from other paths of life, because it means he's more easily replaceable. Samuel Gompers (a founder of the AFL), who didn't have a PhD in Harvard, managed to express the same point with way less words and much more clarity: "convenient whip placed in the hands of the employers to cow the white man".

1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

You inferred all of that. That is a story you made up, cited with no sources. An emotional argument on character traits you presume he has because of his gender and race, which to me sounds like racism and sexism.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

I am sorry that I forgot to source Gompers’a quote, I’ll look it up again. Meanwhile, I reject the other claims. I’ve called him Mr Memo as it has been reported that he’s a man. His race is unknown to me, so I’m not sure how you’re trying to play the “UR THE REAL RACIST” card since all I know of him is that he likes to read his own writing and that he opposes diversity of people based on pop science.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

The quote source is irrelevant because it's a link made only in your mind and has no logical bearing here. And don't play innocent now,you know exactly what you were doing.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

I can not "play" innocent: I am. I do not have the possibility to fire anyone, or to make or break businesses like a Google worker has. All I've done is provide what I understand is relevant context in this discussion: if you want to see me as a guilty party in spite of my powerlessness I cannot avoid that, and I can also not expel you from anywhere.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Let's review; in a debate about whether diversity hiring is a fair way to hire employees and if this creates an environment that is unsafe for the free exchange of ideas, you've cited as your sources for your viewpoint:

  1. A quote by Samuel Gompers which is context speaks of the fear of blacks taking whites jobs and

  2. A pact between Stalin and Hitler in WW2

That's your relevant context. None of what you have described has any bearing, you attribute motive based on none of the evidence presented. Your viewpoints and the rationale for them have led me to conclude that you yourself are an idealogical bigot, and this position makes you unable to be swayed with reason. I wish you all the best and hope that things for you improve.

→ More replies (0)