←back to thread

219 points thisisit | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.348s | source
Show context
asabjorn ◴[] No.16127096[source]
I am a Norwegian in Silicon Valley that have spent most of my career with Chinese colleagues, both in academia and industry, and my anecdata seem to indicate that my highly talented China-born colleagues are sadly leaving because;

- China has great opportunities for riches

- Getting a US VISA is hard and painful when you come from a populous country like China or India

- My China-born colleagues seem to in general be more conservative, and Silicon Valley has become violently intolerant of anyone that holds an opinion different than the predominant view

Only the first reason is somewhat objective, while the two others cause stress in their daily life as their ability to provide can at any time be removed due to what is perceived as arbitrary reasons. Everything being equal, many of them have told me they would prefer the less crowded Silicon Valley.

replies(5): >>16127234 #>>16127351 #>>16127565 #>>16127741 #>>16137338 #
drb91 ◴[] No.16127351[source]
> My China-born colleagues seem to in general be more conservative, and Silicon Valley has become violently intolerant of anyone that holds an opinion different than the predominant view

What exactly does this mean? Are they evangelical baptists, libertarians, reactionaries, nationalist, homophobic, misogynist, racist, anti-atheist, pro family-values, pro corporation, skeptical of global warming, pro fossil fuel energy, war hawks, or something else altogether? It's really quite difficult to interpret your statement as anything meaningful without clarification, and there are ten thousand different ways to be "conservative".

And to be clear, "conservative" is anything but a dirty word or something I'm trying to critique here--just a context-sensitive one. It could be a pejorative or a value.

Otherwise it doesn't add much to the conversation--it is itself a reactionary statement.

replies(11): >>16127387 #>>16127388 #>>16127437 #>>16127581 #>>16127714 #>>16127828 #>>16127890 #>>16127896 #>>16127905 #>>16127997 #>>16131274 #
1. BeetleB ◴[] No.16127890[source]
I cannot speak for the original poster, but my observation in some of these circles:

Lots of bundling the "others" into one bin/box. If a liberal expresses opposition for DACA, then it is automatically assumed that they are a right leaning person, and several related policy attributes are attached to the person.

Often, simply being undecided and questioning a particular stance leads to the same effect.

I've seen it on HN: A general lack of tolerance for certain viewpoints, with perfectly valid questions resulting in accusations. Unfortunately, more often than I would like. Easy examples would be a lot of threads that involve Trump.

BTW, case in point is this other comment:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16127579

Just because the two are well correlated in the US does not make them the same, and if you come from abroad, you will find many things taken as a given in the US (like the conflation of conservatism with religion, or right leaning tendencies with conservatism) that will confuse you. I suspect their experience in SV has been that when they try to bring it up, they get labeled.

I'm guessing Europe has a lot of radically right wing folks who like their national health care just fine. Imagine they move to a very Republican part of the US, and ask "what's wrong with universal healthcare?" and then are labeled as being liberal. Now do that in reverse in SV.

If you've lived a lot in the rest of the world, you will probably easily find lots of examples where liberals are not acting according to their principles, and the same for conservatives. So when someone tries to be what they think is a "real" liberal (which may imply adopting stances that the "other" side is in favor of), then they'll feel unwelcome.

Some day I'll probably write a more thought-out piece on this. The above is just rambling.