Comment by hasbroslasher | Hacker News Reader

Comment by hasbroslasher | Hacker News Reader

I've worked places (not in tech) where I was not allowed to talk about my support for Barack Obama for fear of being shouted down, mocked, or forced to listen to racist diatribes about his history. I have been on the other side of this kind of bullshit. I moved from the small, Midwestern town that harbored these people and their insane beliefs to a liberal, coastal city that "gets" me a little more. I'm happier for it. I work with other coastal liberals and none of us have much respect for anyone who out-and-out supports Donald Trump, and we probably won't any time soon. A lot of us share this background.

I suggest these men do the same. Move to Dallas or New York or somewhere where conservatism is a little more appreciated. Move to Denver or Atlanta. Find somewhere that feels like home, where there are other conservative techies. Claiming the victim status as a white man in the most expensive city, in the highest paying industry comes off as a little entitled, at least to me.

I did that recently, moved from the Bay Area to a red state. But, what about the concept of engaging with and challenging people who have different beliefs?

People don't really change their minds when you call them a racist, fire them, etc. When I am talking to a liberal who I know wont try to cause problems for me (like getting me fired), I will ask lots of questions.

Why do you believe X? What facts support that opinion? I believe Y because ..., where do you think the flaw in my logic is? Why do you think value A is more important that counter-value B?

It's really depressing that someone such as yourself, who has known what it is to be descriminated against for what you think are reasonable beliefs, would perpetuate the same against others.

If you think someone's views are wrong, then ask them why they think that. At worst, you'll get a better insight into how to point out why they are wrong. At best, you'll have a chance of convincing them that your position is better.

I'm not saying I can't/won't/don't do that. I love discussing politics with my family, who are very conservative, and it's always nice and respectful. I just don't want to live in their society. Generally, they don't want to live in mine either. Not every liberal around me believes exactly the same thing. We'll quarrel about whether Black Lives Matter is doing good or whether UBI is actually an evil capitalist plot or whether someone like Hillary Clinton really represents what we're about. It's not as groupthink-y as the men in this article claim.

When I meet informed conservatives, I quietly rejoice because it's so interesting to talk to them. One of my best friends is also a "free market" type guy and we get along amazingly well, even when we talk politics. However, I haven't found many educated people who out-and-out support Donald Trump, and those I have found often express very caustic beliefs that get in the way of polite or fulfilling discussions. Hence, I just don't do it. There's a level of "coming to the center" that those people just won't do with me, so it ends up devolving into a series of fallacies that just don't need to happen.

It's nice that you have some friends that you can discuss opposing views with. I also cherish some of my liberal friends who I can have a genuine discussion with.

I've also had some bad experiences with family members who support Trump and are super emotional, vocal, and resistant to any discussion about him either on the policy- or simple behavior-level.

IMO there is a hidden wedge in politics between people who are willing to engage with their opinions and others who will take your beliefs in the worst possible context. It's not necessarily a right-left thing, or even a centrist/extremist thing either. I've had some of the most enlightening discussions about politics with people that are super extreme in their progressivism, communism, or conservatism, because they are so knowledgable about political philosophy or the data supporting their beliefs.

> But, what about the concept of engaging with and challenging people who have different beliefs?

What about not doing it at work, since that is not what anybody is there for?

That'd be fine with me if it was enforced equally. I haven't worked anywhere that attempted to do that, so not sure if it'd work or not. But, I'm skeptical.

I think what may happen is that it'd go underground. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not. It may be a kind of secret reason to cause strife between employees.

It would have to be supported as a broader part of the company culture. No discussing things that aren't relevant to work. A "We're here to work and that's it." kind of policy.

It is very odd that you assumed I was talking about setting a company policy. When I wrote "What about not doing it at work," I was talking about a social and behavioral norm.

I don't think it's that odd. This norm doesn't really exist currently. How do you think a company could encourage their employees to not talk politics at work?

This varies depending on the community you're a part of. I don't have any exposure to what Silicon Valley is currently like, so I can't speak to that. (other than to question how these people who are supposedly giving 110% have so much time to discuss politics...)

When I lived in Berkeley everyone felt very free to start a conversation about politics with any random person they happened to encounter. Nice people, but that can cause fatigue. My current Midwestern corporate work environment is basically the opposite of that: someone can talk about politics but if they're speaking in a group or to someone they're not very close to, they're going to get a funny look and they'll generally take the hint and drop it.

I don't know what our employee handbook says about all that but it's being handled at a different, social level. It's not perfect (my boss's boss occasionally makes bizarre political jokes which would cause a little trouble if they made people feel stepped on, instead of amused) but I suspect we should regard actual company policy as just a fallback for dealing with this sort of thing. Mostly, people just need to exercise some social discretion as part of the corporate culture.

I'd suggest the golden rule should be applicable here. There are enough divisions in our society as it is - I don't believe that literal segregation by political preference is a good solution, an any timeframe

Reply on news.ycombinator.com