This may be a sign that it’s become increasingly hard to organize or take part in such activism outside of work. What happened?
I'm partial to Aaron Levie's take on this[1]:
> An alternative take on the importance of companies taking a stand on critical social issues that impact our employees and communities: when there's a vacuum of leadership from the government in dealing with these topics, businesses often need to lead more than ever.
When we have had presidents who were willing to condemn white supremacy, we tended not to call on CEOs to.
1. https://mobile.twitter.com/levie/status/1311007294033854464
https://twitter.com/robsmithonline/status/131113297546835968...
He doesn't condemn, he validates with just enough deniability that people can make lists like the one you posted, while everyone who is following along sees exactly what is happening.
Also he was pushed really hard and seemed willing to denounce violent far right, not just in sweeping terms.
Also: Contrast this to Biden (who could easily be my favorite except for his candidate for vice president) who AFAIK refuse to denounce ANTIFA at all.
I dislike Trump and I am scared by how many seems to be close to worshipping him as a family values guy despite his two broken marriages and other problems.
That said, I think he will easily win again this year. Why?
- underdog sympathy: media tackles him harder and it seems easy to see as an unbiased observer (Again: not a native speaker, but at least I don't want either of them, although in Bidens case that is more because of his choice of vice president candidate.)
- BLM is out everyday to remind people to vote for a law-and-order president
- the Left still underestimating the discontent in the working class
- Trump simultaneously bringing home troops and strengthening the armed forces so people won't lose their lives or their jobs (for now).
- His support for law enforcement (unlike HN-ers many people seems to support the police)
- He is actually wildly successful in certain areas. He has actually managed to get more peace in the Middle East than a number of other presidents, including Obama who got the Nobel peace price.
That said: I don't like him.
I'd rather have any decent engineer or business(wo)man or teacher who knows a bit about politics, can keep their mouth shut at times etc.
It was not.
Relevant portion of the transcript:
WALLACE: “Are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists and militia groups…”
TRUMP: “Sure…”
WALLACE: “And to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence in a number of these cities as we saw in Kenosha, and as we’ve seen in Portland”
TRUMP: “Sure, I’m prepared to do it, but I would say almost everything I see is from the left-wing not from the right-wing. I’m willing to do anything, I want to see peace…”
WALLACE: “Then do it, sir.”
BIDEN: “Do it, say it.”
TRUMP: “What do you want to call them? Give me a name.”
WALLACE: “White supremacists and right-wing militias”
BIDEN: “Proud Boys”
Trump: “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by. But I’ll tell you what, somebody’s got to do something about Antifa and the left.”
[...]
Trump: “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by.
Trump parroted the language in the request by Chris Wallace and the named individuals from Biden. It was a gotcha request.
No, he didn't. And while he does have trouble focussing long enough to string together a full coherent sentence, he's not so incompetent with words and shirt phrases to not understand the difference with, or to a inadvertently swap, the terms with very different meaning “stand back”, and particularly “stand by” when intending to repeat “stand down”.
“stand down” means to demobilize.
“stand back” means to pause, usually for planning or emotional reflection.
“stand by” means to be ready for action or orders.
If the way the comment was received is incorrect, then it is up to Trump to correct it. Obviously, he will not be doing so.
You can draw your own conclusions.
In fact, the media tends not to report on the added emphasis on the “stand by”, which served to minimize the “stand back”.
Let's be honest here: if Trump had "unequivocally" said "I condemn White Supremacy", what would have happened, practically? Do you think for a second that the media would have suddenly "let him off the hook"? Problem solved? No more white supremacy talk?
There is footage of him disavowing the KKK, and David Duke, going back 20 years, believe it or not. Has it made a difference?
The fact that question was even asked demonstrates just how far the US political system has fallen. Kind of embarrassing. The fact that Trump doesn't simply repeat the condemnation -- for whatever that's worth -- is sad and polarizing. But let's not pretend it changes anyone's opinion on anything.
>He doesn't condemn, he validates with just enough deniability
Much like many Democrats did with regards to the looting and burning of cities.
And the Proud Boys' leader looks pretty black for a white supremacist.
If you say a group should be condemned but then proceed to justify their actions it’s barely a slap on the wrist, and coming from the president the lack of a strong response is actually a form of encouragement.
Uh no, he's saying "white supremacists" and "proud boys" are two different groups.
https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/proud-boys-enrique-tarrio...
The country is tearing itself apart right now because we really do have two camps with opposite beliefs that each feel they are fighting for the survival of the nation itself. Read what the other side says about themselves, and not just what your side says about them.
I might be over-simplifying but the vast majority of people most affected by political decisions no longer have the incomes and free time to partake in such activism.
For example if you cared about something like workers' unions (let's assume the relatively well-run, non-corrupt version), the people in the best place to perform the activism do not feel they need the unions because they have the spare income and time (ex. tech workers at TechCompanyX). Those who would be most helped by the activism (ex. workers in TechCompanyX's factories/warehouses/wherever) have grueling work schedules and lower pay.
It will be interesting to see where this takes the culture of Coinbase.
The cynic in me feels like it's a casual way for engineers to feel better about themselves.
It's no wonder to me that this "bring your whole self to work" nonsense sprung up at ad-tech companies like Google.
And by the way - the political stuff never is about anything that Google does. I haven't seen any tax law, anti-trust, or privacy protests at Google.
Huh? https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/27/18114285/google-employee...
Essentially that means that for the company, it ends up being a win-win situation. They satisfy their employees' urges to perform activism and they get brownie points from the public for promoting a "noble" sounding cause with minimal effort, all the while not having to rock the boat by having to defend their opinion because it's defacto assumed to be good and justified. E.g. have a look at the whole Goya Foods incident to find out what happens if a company happens to support a non activist-approved point of view.