Silicon Valley liberals are suffering from dramatic meltdowns in response to an anonymous Google engineer’s 10 page document currently going viral, titled ‘Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,’ which offers a scathing criticism of the company’s ‘anti-conservative’ and ‘left-leaning’ internal culture.
Labeled an ‘anti-diversity screed’ by Gizmodo, the treatise calls for Google to replace it’s politically correct ‘diversity initiatives’ with ‘ideological diversity,’ and suggests that the gender pay gap between men and women isn’t entirely related to bias against women – and is instead partially attributable to biological differences between genders.
Internal article circulated at work today describing how gender rep gap in SW is due to biological differences btwn men/women.
— Sarah Adams (@sadams007) August 4, 2017
Read below (emphasis added):
Reply to public response and misrepresentation
I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem. Psychological safety is built on mutual respect and acceptance, but unfortunately our culture of shaming and misrepresentation is disrespectful and unaccepting of anyone outside its echo chamber. Despite what the public response seems to have been, I’ve gotten many personal messages from fellow Googlers expressing their gratitude for bringing up these very important issues which they agree with but would never have the courage to say or defend because of our shaming culture and the possibility of being fired. This needs to change.
TL:DR
- Google’s political bias has equated the freedom from offense with psychological safety, but shaming into silence is the antithesis of psychological safety.
- This silencing has created an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed.
- The lack of discussion fosters the most extreme and authoritarian elements of this ideology.
- Extreme: all disparities in representation are due to oppression
- Authoritarian: we should discriminate to correct for this oppression
- Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership. Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.
(click here to read in it’s entirety)
Google Response
Google’s VP of Diversity, Danielle Brown, issued a milquetoast response:
“Many of you have read an internal document shared by someone in our engineering organization, expressing views on the natural abilities and characteristics of different genders, as well as whether one can speak freely of these things at Google. And like many of you, I found that it advanced incorrect assumptions about gender. I’m not going to link to it here as it’s not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.
Diversity and inclusion are a fundamental part of our values and the culture we continue to cultivate. We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company, and we’ll continue to stand for that and be committed to it for the long haul. As Ari Balogh said in his internal G+ post, “Building an open, inclusive environment is core to who we are, and the right thing to do. ‘Nuff said.”
SJW’s in a tizzy
Via ZeroHedge:
The 10-page Google Doc document was met with furious derision from a large majority of employees but Jaana Dogan, a software engineer at Google, tweeted that some people at the company at least partially agreed with the author; one of our sources said the same. While the document itself contains the thoughts of just one Google employee, the context in which they were shared — Silicon Valley has been repeatedly exposed as a place that discriminates against women and people of color — as well as the private and public response from its workforce are important.
“The broader context of this is that this person is perhaps bolder than most of the people at Google who share his viewpoint—of thinking women are less qualified than men—to the point he was willing to publicly argue for it. But there are sadly more people like him,” the employee who described the document’s contents to me said.
Numerous Google employees expressed their outrage about the paper:
That garbage fire of a document is trash and you are wonderful coworkers who I am extremely lucky to work with.
— Andrew Bonventre (@andybons) August 4, 2017
Please don't let the grunting slobbery of a few outweigh the strong support you have by many many more people. We're here.
— Louis Gray (@louisgray) August 4, 2017
To summarize
Presumably conservative Google engineer has had enough of the company’s internal SJW bullshit and pens 10 page document suggesting the company stop alienating conservatives.
Deciding introspection is out of the question and the author must simply be a racist, Google SJW’s reject the letter in it’s entirety and instead throw a gigantic tantrum.
Where have we seen this before?
Comments »
