Comment by dmode | Hacker News Reader

Comment by dmode | Hacker News Reader

I have no idea what this article was about. As someone who grew up in India, lived extensively in Europe and Arizona before settling down in the Bay Area, and travel to China 2-3 times a year, I find Bay Area by far to be the most open, tolerant, accepting places I have ever lived. And it is not even comparable. And it is borne out by simple stats. People vote with their feet. Bay Area is almost a majority minority area, with equal representations of white folks, south asians, east asians, hispanics (although smaller African American population). This is not a coincidence. This is because people here are naturally accepting of other cultures, view points etc.

And comparing this to Beijing is laughable. When I travel to China, my life is put on hold as you cannot access Gmail, Facebook, Whatsapp and myriad of other mundane websites. I dare not write anything negative about the Chinese government when I am there.

India is also becoming intolerant by the day, where even the though of eating beef can lead of mob lynching or ending up in jail. Even benign things such as a Bollywood movie (Padmavati) is in trouble for imagined cultural threats.

I have lived extensively in Netherlands and Denmark. I love those countries as they are progressive in many ways. Except for the acceptance of a brown man. I don't hold any grudge, it is what it is and it is difficult for such a small country to be open about cultural integration.

I have found Bay Area to be an open community, where no matter you background you just seamlessly integrate. You go to work without thinking how you have to tweak your accent or deep dive in cultural norms to progress through corporate hierarchy (I have done that a lot as a consultant). All it matters is your work and output.

Sure, we have yet to figure out how to approach "tolerance of intolerance", but it will evolve over time and we will arrive at a sweet spot. Many countries have taken a extreme free speech stance on "tolerance of intolerance" - for example, UK allowed one Egyptian preacher to openly preach hatred and violence from the streets of London. Is that a good thing for society ? I am not so convinced.

In America, you can criticize the government but cannot talk at all about controversial social issues. Many Americans abide by the rule: "do not talk about politics and religion among polite company." I've known people who have legitimately ended friendships over political opinions. Such a thing is almost unheard of in China.

In China, you cannot criticize the government but you can talk all day about social issues, and you will actually hear a diverse range of different opinions on hot-button issues. I've heard all sorts of wacky and very interesting opinions, many of which have forced me to think deeply about my beliefs, when talking with people in Beijing.

In China you can talk shit of government all you want, many people on the street will even agree it with you. Just don't write and publish it.

You can certainly talk about controversial social issues in America, you just have to be prepared for people to not like you.

I think you may be running into another facet of American culture and misinterpreting interactions through that lens. In America, you pick your tribe. If you don't like someone, don't hang out with them! Friendships tend to come and go based on your circumstances of the moment, and if they fade away, it's no big deal, you'll make new friends. While in China (and many other places in the world), you're born into a tribe, and people will make significant compromises to their individual happiness to maintain relationships. Many Asian families exhibit behavior that borders on child abuse by American standards and would result in a kid cutting that parent out of their life, while such a thing is basically unheard of in Chinese culture.

I've got one Chinese parent and my wife is full Taiwanese-American. This was an uncomfortable cultural difference for both of us to learn, and we still sometimes feel the loss of that social web. But American society makes more sense when you view relationships through the lens of "people only maintain them while it is mutually beneficial and fulfilling for both parties, and if one person doesn't feel like the relationship is worth it they'll end it, and so your actions better bring joy and fulfillment to those around you."

You could end up getting fired, though.

So then you get fired, and get another job. Or found a company that ends up dominating the company you got fired from, as the heads of IBM, Apple, and Pixar all did.

American business culture is the same as social culture: association is voluntary, and once either party no longer finds it worthwhile, bye. The flip side of that is that there's relatively little judgment attached to being fired. Future employers may ask a few extra questions to try to determine whether the factors that got you fired from your last job are likely to impact your performance in the next one, but if it really is a matter of cultural mismatch (like a difference in political opinions would be), then you can basically be sure that there is some company out there that doesn't care.

You're absolutely right that the Bay Area offers more freedom than India or China in terms of safely espousing your views. In our lack of government-imposed restrictions, however, we've come to restrict ourselves as a society, and many believe that we've taken these restrictions too far.

America has progressed through openness to ideological diversity, and through healthily engaging in debate. We're lucky that those who have created/promoted controversial technologies and ideas have been able to so legally, but what is it worth if they're never engaged with? What is all of our ethnic diversity worth if everyone, full of unique perspectives, is forced to tiptoe around most subjects?

It's great to have freedom of speech, but its societal value is substantially diminished when we aren't willing to communicate with the people it protects.

> UK allowed one Egyptian preacher to openly preach hatred and violence

As a side note, our freedom of speech in the US is more hard-wired and extensive than that of the UK, and even we don't allow speech that directly incites violence.

With the caveat that "incitement" is quite carefully defined.

No, not true. The Bay Area is ideologically safer in only two regards: you can criticize the city, and you can criticize the government. If you have personal beliefs that are even a tiny bit different from orthodoxy, Beijing is a far safer place.

Really ? Do you openly discuss LGBT rights in Beijing ? What about rights of Uighur folks in China ? Do you discuss that in Beijing ? What about Tibetian rights ? Is that discussed ?

Yes. You can talk to people in Beijing, especially college students, about these issues and more. One of my friends is an ethnic minority in China and talked about these issues with Han Chinese folk with no negative consequences. Many young people in China are also ready to talk about LGBT issues. There is no problem.

As long as you don't try to subvert the government or anything, you can talk about it.

As long as you don't try to do anything about it, you can discuss whatever you want?

Yeah. That's precisely the idea behind "freedom of speech", that even if you're restricted in doing a lot of things, the restrictions on talking about is as little as possible.

Talking about it influences opinions, and when critical mass is reached, even autocratic governments sometimes are forced to abide by the consensus of their people.

Noone's claiming that China is a better or more progressive country btw, just that in this very specific regard, US is worse than China.

I meant government-protected physical safety; I should've clarified.

As I said in the rest of my post, I agree with you that there's more room for ideological diversity without being ostracized in many other places.

Can you expand on your experience as a brown man in Denmark? Where did you live? I would like your take on it.

I used to live in Frederiksberg, which is practically Copenhagen. I loved Denmark, but as with most European countries, there is a specific definition of what "Dane" means. Foreigners will always be an outsider(vastly different than living in the Bay Area). I also sensed some discomfort with "white collar" brown folks. As most of Danish interactions with brown people is limited to Doner Kebab restaurants and Afghani run grocery stores. There were very few non-white white collar workers. I also faced outright racial hostility, but thankfully those instances were very few. If you are considering a move to Denmark, think about this is an European moving to India and China. It is like expat living as chances of integrating to a Danish society will be minimal.

To be completely fair, and by my own experience, it doesn't get any better for a caucasian foreigner.

I'm with you on this. I've been living in the US for three years and literally never faced any racism of any sort. I went to vacation in Amsterdam and some shit faced kid decided to harass me cause I'm Indian within two days of being there. Anecdotal, but yeah.

While in SF / SV, can you feel the general air of the ideas acceptable here? A small experiment: take an idea which obviously contradicts that air, and imagine rationally discussing it with people who you typically meet in SF. Will it be more than slightly uncomfortable?

Scott Alexander wrote this great piece, I leave a link to it here: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything...

For instant enlightenment, search for the word "Bodhidharma" and read the short parable.

While on HN, you can feel the general air of acceptable ideas.

Sam Altman is not concerned that a leftist can't have a sane discussion on this website. But he IS concerned that a bigoted racist can't be openly bigoted at work.

Weird. I wonder why it is that Sam Altman is so concerned about the rights of bigots to be openly bigoted? Definitely couldn't be related to his relationship with Peter Thiel. No way...

I don't see left agenda oppressed on HN. E.g. posts about universal basic income, allegedly a rather left-wing policy, appear here often, are highly upvoted and, to my mind, discussed in a quite civil manner.

It's always easier to assume that your argument is being dismissed because the other side is ignorant or intolerant. As dang points out in a sibling comment to yours, it seems to be universal.

I've found most of HN willing to dive fairly deep on any topic as long as you remain respectful and don't present your self unwilling to actually reconsider your opinion. The problem is that all too often, assholes don't realize that how much an asshole they are comes across very clearly in how they present themselves or their ideas, and many people don't like interacting with assholes. The other problem is that we're all assholes sometimes.

>I don't see left agenda oppressed on HN. E.g. posts about universal basic income, allegedly a rather left-wing policy, appear here often, are highly upvoted and, to my mind, discussed in a quite civil manner.

And further, I've noticed that even the most anodyne comments here that express even slightly right-of-center views get heavily downvoted.

Comments like this and your other one at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15925935 are so interesting to me because the opposing comments are so similar: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15752730, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15307915, lots more at https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=.... From my perspective it brings out how much the people at the poles have in common. (That's not an argument in favor of the ideological center btw; if you think that kind of averaging is dumb, I agree. The way out is not so easy.)

> Definitely couldn't be related to his relationship with Peter Thiel

You might have the arrow of causality reversed there. Also, please don't lash out personally. It's true that public figures are just cartoon characters in most people's minds, and you don't owe any better to cartoon characters, but you do owe better to this community if you're commenting here.

I'm a "leftist", and I had plenty of sane and interesting discussions on this website.

I have in fact had many rational discussions with people I disagree with in SF. Around guns, libertarianism, and unlimited freedom on the right and huge taxes on the rich, free healthcare for all, and socialism on the left.

This isn't that hard! The trick is you have to start with an open mind and try to understand where they're coming from. That's true in every place in the US - you aren't going to convince people of your "truth" 99.5% of the time, you're only going to understand their truth.

However! Expecting everyone to want an open discussion or even to hear about your pet controversial topic will make your life hard no matter where you go unless people are pretty close to you politically.

It sounds like sama just discovered that sacred cows are different in different locations. The experience of discussing whether women are are predisposed to avoid tech careers, or the problems associated with ethnic minorities, as a wealthy American speaking with Chinese startup leaders and other expats is probably different from that of speaking to a US audience. I suspect part of the reason is that the wider US audience is more likely to include ethnic minorities, politically active gay people, and ambitious women in tech[1]. I doubt a discussion of Chinese sacred cows would be as open - in fact, I doubt most westerners without expat experience could even detect the absence of many locally controversial topics from the discussion.

PC stifling of speech often gets laid at the feet of politics and academia, but the hyperbolic increase in thought-policing really seems to be a tech-related phenomenon intersecting with corporate priorities. There are a lot of people outside of tech and SF who are willing to discuss hard topics as long as everyone is willing to have skin in the game.

[1]although I acknowledge that there are a lot of women in Chinese tech and that the social dynamic is different, and suspect that they are more receptive to the idea of sex differences in occupational preferences.

Yes, but in Beijing, you see, you can discuss radical life extension with fellow Chinese billionaires. That really changes everything. /s

Reply on news.ycombinator.com