Most active commenters
  • downandout(4)
  • seanmcdirmid(3)
  • nabla9(3)
  • ameister14(3)

←back to thread

Like Peter Thiel, Tech Workers Feel Alienated by Silicon Valley ‘Echo Chamber’

(www.wsj.com)
370 points sillypuddy | 16 comments | 18 Feb 18 16:50 UTC | HN request time: 2.985s | source | bottom
Show context
twblalock ◴[18 Feb 18 21:03 UTC] No.16408620[source]▶
I don't get it. I grew up in Silicon Valley and I work in tech, and so do many other people I know. They run the gamut from far-left socialists to libertarians to own a bunch of guns. They have all kinds of ethnic backgrounds and religious views.

Some of my most libertarian/pro-gun friends have not been shy about their political views and it hasn't hurt their tech careers at all. They are far more welcome here than liberals are in other parts of the country.

It seems to me, from personal experience, that the people who feel alienated are the ones who bring politics to work in an overbearing contrarian way, seeking to cause offense under the guise of "debate," and then pretend to be shocked when people don't want to put up with their shit. Work is for working; it's not a debating society, and especially not when the debating is done in bad faith.

Peter Thiel has been more politically vocal than most, and he is vocal about things he knows to be unpopular. He can't be surprised that people who disagree with him are also vocal. If he can't take the heat he should stay out of the kitchen.

replies(29): >>16408700 #>>16408702 #>>16408705 #>>16408726 #>>16408777 #>>16408809 #>>16408824 #>>16408832 #>>16408894 #>>16408911 #>>16408984 #>>16408994 #>>16409069 #>>16409106 #>>16409126 #>>16409261 #>>16409276 #>>16409302 #>>16409316 #>>16409491 #>>16409495 #>>16409549 #>>16409619 #>>16409750 #>>16409776 #>>16410248 #>>16411133 #>>16412246 #>>16418372 #
downandout ◴[18 Feb 18 21:16 UTC] No.16408726[source]▶
If he can't take the heat he should stay out of the kitchen.

I think that's the whole point though. The article is saying that there is too much heat simply because they express their opposing viewpoints. "Stay out of the kitchen" means "close your mouth around Silicon Valley liberals" or you'll experience backlash.

While this may not be your personal experience, the article essentially says that the somewhat ironic message coming out of the Valley from people in the "party of tolerance" is that they tolerate everyone except those that have opposing viewpoints.

replies(1): >>16408743 #
twblalock ◴[18 Feb 18 21:19 UTC] No.16408743[source]▶
> "Stay out of the kitchen" means "close your mouth around Silicon Valley liberals" or you'll experience backlash.

No, it means don't expect to be able to say controversial stuff without people who disagree with you also having their say.

replies(3): >>16408769 #>>16409246 #>>16409632 #
downandout ◴[18 Feb 18 21:22 UTC] No.16408769[source]▶
The problem is that among this crowd, simply saying "I voted for Trump" or "I hated Hillary so I just didn't vote" is considered "controversial" and worthy of personal and professional backlash.
replies(2): >>16408806 #>>16408890 #
nabla9 ◴[18 Feb 18 21:42 UTC] No.16408890[source]▶
How is "I voted for Trump" (and I don't regret it) not controversial?

I understand that there are many people who voted for Trump, but that does not mean that the opinion is something that should be considered being in line with the norms of the free society and far past conservative viewpoint.

(Not in the sense that you have no right to your opinion, in the sense that person having that opinion loses the respect of others.)

replies(3): >>16408930 #>>16408944 #>>16409581 #
1. downandout ◴[18 Feb 18 21:52 UTC] No.16408944[source]▶
Again, this is a perfect example of the absurd overreaction that Valley liberals have to the idea that someone might have some conservative views. You sound like you voted for Hillary...do you endorse every single thing she has ever done and said? Did that "I'm with her" shirt you probably bought apply to the Clinton Foundation scandal and the use of an unsecured private email server for classified emails? Probably not.

It's the same with Trump. Some voters - many millions of them - overlooked his many flaws and voted for him, for any of a variety of reasons. That doesn't automatically make them racists, bigots, sexists, idiots, or any of the other labels that liberals like to put on Trump voters. I'm not even endorsing a specific viewpoint here - I'm just saying that instantly ostracizing someone from their workplace social scene (if not their job altogether) based on one data point that by itself means next to nothing is wrong.

replies(3): >>16409005 #>>16409050 #>>16409157 #
2. seanmcdirmid ◴[18 Feb 18 22:02 UTC] No.16409005[source]▶
I can understand why someone would vote for Romney, McCain, Bush, Dole, but for the life of me I assume that if you voted for Trump you were ok with everything that was known about him; e.g. you believe it is OK to talk about grabbing pussies in the locker room. Trump is special, never before have we had a candidate on either side like this, at least Bill Clinton appeared to be ashamed about his BJ in the whitehouse.

That really has nothing to do with Silicon Valley specifically, Trump supporter has become a bad word in many big cities that Bush supporter never was.

replies(2): >>16409193 #>>16412346 #
3. nabla9 ◴[18 Feb 18 22:08 UTC] No.16409050[source]▶
> Clinton Foundation scandal and the use of an unsecured private email server for classified emails? Probably not.

This is false equivalence. People like Clinton might appear corrupt for republicans and Dick Cheney might be horrible for democrats, but Trump is in completely different plane.

>workplace social scene (if not their job altogether) based on one data point that by itself means next to nothing is wrong.

What you think is the threshold where political opinion can become personal? When your family is deported?

replies(2): >>16409111 #>>16409809 #
4. downandout ◴[18 Feb 18 22:16 UTC] No.16409111[source]▶
You missed my point. I was saying that all candidates have flaws, and people find reasons to vote for them anyway. Whether you voted for Trump or Hillary, you were voting for a flawed candidate. It is only your personal political bias that makes Trump in "completely different plane".
replies(1): >>16409178 #
5. greglindahl ◴[18 Feb 18 22:22 UTC] No.16409157[source]▶
Absurd overreaction? I haven't seen that, but I do see people complaining that their free speech causes others to also speak.
6. nabla9 ◴[18 Feb 18 22:25 UTC] No.16409178{3}[source]▶
>your personal political bias that makes Trump in "completely different plane".

Of course. Everything does. It's just of general description of reality.

7. berberous ◴[18 Feb 18 22:28 UTC] No.16409193[source]▶
How old are you? I remember people crying when Bush won in 2004. I remember some girl refusing to date a friend of mine because he voted for Bush. Bush received plenty of vilification, which if you are young, is easy to forget given the left now views him like an adorable goofy grandpa. The hate was intense at the time. (Although yes, it’s worse for Trump).
replies(1): >>16409252 #
8. seanmcdirmid ◴[18 Feb 18 22:39 UTC] No.16409252{3}[source]▶
Old enough to remember Bush’s popularity sky rocketing after 9/11. Bush received plenty of vilification from the extreme left, but the moderate left were willing to go along with him as long as everything worked out (which is why he won in 2004). Bush was incredibly likable and didn’t come off as profane even to those that hated his politics.

The thing about Trump is that the moderate left and even many from the moderate right (my uncle never voted for a democrat until 2016) are mostly disgusted with the guy. It isn’t really about politics as it is about human decency against sexism, racism, and so on.

9. ameister14 ◴[19 Feb 18 00:21 UTC] No.16409809[source]▶
>What you think is the threshold where political opinion can become personal? When your family is deported?

Hilariously enough, Clinton and Obama deported far and away more people.

replies(1): >>16409880 #
10. dragonwriter ◴[19 Feb 18 00:36 UTC] No.16409880{3}[source]▶
Trump deported more people already living in the US; Clinton and Obama deported more at the border, by enough that total deportations were higher.
replies(2): >>16409907 #>>16411402 #
11. ameister14 ◴[19 Feb 18 00:43 UTC] No.16409907{4}[source]▶
Actually, Clinton deported more in both ways. We weren't counting people deported at the border as deportees at the time.
12. DrScump ◴[19 Feb 18 07:49 UTC] No.16411402{4}[source]▶
Turning away somebody at a border is not deportation.
replies(2): >>16412575 #>>16413802 #
13. Chris2048 ◴[19 Feb 18 12:01 UTC] No.16412346[source]▶
> you believe it is OK to talk about grabbing pussies in the locker room

Talk is cheap. There's little reason Trump has sexually harassed anyone more than Bill Clinton - and Hillary still sticks by him.

replies(1): >>16413736 #
14. ameister14 ◴[19 Feb 18 12:59 UTC] No.16412575{5}[source]▶
Well, it's been counted that way since the 2nd bush administration
15. seanmcdirmid ◴[19 Feb 18 16:20 UTC] No.16413736{3}[source]▶
I don't think even Trump has sexually harassed Bill Clinton.
16. dragonwriter ◴[19 Feb 18 16:31 UTC] No.16413802{5}[source]▶
It's part of the deportation stats and the only things that makes the “Trump deported more than Obama” thing even technically true.

Obviously, yes, there is a substantive difference between removing someone who has only entered so far as the border checkpoint is on the US side of the border and removing someone who has been living in the US. That's the whole point of pointing it out.