I'm curious if you could share some of your stories.
Since last year, I've stopped using social media like FB. When the summer came around, my friends were posting political stuff online and noticed I wasn't interacting with it. My phone would then blow up with messages along the theme of: "are you showing your real self by not supporting x?".
Ideology follows many of the same basic structures as a religious belief system, in many cases ideology is a subset of a religious belief system, but in this case it's not. Combine that with the extreme polarization and demonization of the other side*, one of the oldest propaganda techniques ever[0], you end up with cult-like mentality. Even some circles (on both sides) will have love-bombing [1], a technique used to recruit new members. I grew up in a cult (Jehovah's Witnesses) and went against my dad when I was 16 to get out of it. Once you've been though that stuff and come out on the other side, you can't help but not see it in the modern political climate and it's disgusting.
My skip level manager had me in a 1-on-1 once and said something along the lines: “you probably got the green card because Trump likes your demographic”. (I have an EB-1 extraordinary ability green card, and I assume they were talking about me being straight and white). What the fuck am I supposed to say there? Was absolutely speechless. Moments like that are basically shit tests: “are you one of us?” Pretty sure I failed that test. Oh well.
One time quite recently I shared a Joe Rogan podcast on slack (Moxie from Signal was on there). I then went to sleep. Man, when I woke up the thread was popping with “I refuse to click on this link”, “Joe Rogan is a transphobe”. Someone posting stories about Joe Rogan being friends with Alex Jones and how problematic that is. Nothing to do with the actual podcast episode with Moxie. If anything, it was hilariously ironic because they were talking about how Signal provides privacy for people and how, if you don’t have privacy, people will scrutinise everything you’ve ever said and find ways to #cancel you. Just bizarre. I couldn’t even be bothered to respond.
Honestly most stories at work are just the accumulation of tiny comments here and there. Just the odd joke about conservatives or the implicit assumption you agree with them. One time some girl at work told me “I can tell you’re not as liberal as us”. I asked her why, because I definitely wasn’t but I also definitely didn’t bother arguing at work. She said she could just tell by my vibe. I mean it’s true. Fair play to her I guess.
Your skip level manager experience reminds me of an interaction with a diversity officer at my previous employer.
The company had hired a diversity officer and she began an initiative that requierd all company employees take an optional cultural course that was essentially something about power dynamics between culture/race. Since it wasn't really relevant to my role, I decided not to take the course as it was optional... until I found out it wasn't. I started receiving emails and phone calls from the diversity officer that I should take the course. I thought it was a bit weird and just ignored her. She then contacted my boss and told her to tell me to take the course. Starting to get pissed off, I asked my boss if the course was option, she said yes, then I said I'm not taking it.
I'm mixed race with mainly French and Indian ancestry and while I can pass for full white (albeit a white person that spends time in the sun), my skin is tanned just enough that I can pass for other ethnic groups as well. However, my name is undoubtedly French.
I then received an email from the diversity officer saying that I was an example of a problematic white person and that I was probably ignoring her because she was female and Indian. Then I was contacted by HR for discriminatory conduct and told to report to their office. When I showed up at the office, I could visibly see they were confused as they were clearly expecting someone that didn't look like me. Luckily for me, some of my family is Hindu and I happened to be wearing a religious bracelet I received as a present and I was basically able to fend off their accusations of racism and whatnot. Left the company shortly afterwards.
If that were me, my next few words back to the diversity officer would probably get me fired depending on how rational the people in charge of my employment were. If they were just as irrational as her, I would definitely be getting the boot though.
>! You must know that Joe Rogan is a polarizing figure and posting him in any but a right-wing community is going to be a troll for reactions
My PhD work was on Signal. I work in security. I literally just wanted to talk about Signal, man. It was actually pretty disappointing to me people talked about how problematic Joe Rogan is instead.
> you should reflect upon your reaction if a podcast from a thinker you despised was posted.
I just said I have a gazillion stories about how it’s better to keep silent in San Francisco than voice your opinion. Trust me, I wouldn’t react the same way.
I definitely don’t want to #csncel e.g. John Oliver just because he said some shit I disagreed with once. I hate that culture. In fact, I’d probably share him if he happened to be saying something I thought was interesting at the time. I think I have before when he was talking about Apple privacy or blockchains actually. So no, I wouldn’t react the same way.
> imagine someone posted a podcast of an ideologue, in a place where you feel safe expressing your opinion, as the detractors of your Joe Rogan piece felt safe where you posted him.
Are you trying to get me to say my reaction would be the same? It just wouldn’t be. I would at least listen to the episode before just commenting. Also where exactly is this place? My small group of friends? My partner? Anonymously online? That’s basically it. Because it’s definitely not work or social media.
> Certainly with a PhD you can't actually have been surprised by the reaction to your post. What's the point of your performative surprise?
Someone asked me for some weird stories from San Francisco, so I shared some.
> Is it that you don't feel safe expressing your opinion in certain places
Yeah that’s pretty much the point of my stories and the topic of this HN thread.
> You can't change the world for the better by trolling.
Yea this conversation is over then. If you think I’m just trying to troll people there’s really no point for me to talk to you.
The guy you're replying to appears to be a perfect example of a woke idiot. The whole idea that Joe Rogan is extremely controversial is incredibly stupid. The guy has an interesting, super popular podcast where he talks to super interesting people in a very chill, entertaining way. How terrible. This idea that you have to ban anyone that ever said anything you disagreed with is extremely illiberal and sounds like something from a totalitarian society.
I had a guy at work once who told me that he was a fan of HBO's Silicone Valley until he heard of that email one of its writers sent. After that he stopped watching the show. I asked him if he does constant research to find out if a person who produces any entertainment he likes said or did something bad in his personal life & then stops watching or listening any of the content they had something to do with. He said yes.
There are enough stories criticizing "the tolerant left" to support the notion that had Moodles been in the opposite end of this situation, he likely would not have reacted in the same extreme way. There is a culture with an express goal of fostering intolerance of average people, and San Francisco hosts a concentration of it.
Perhaps OP assumed the coworkers were able to think critically and not engage in basic ad hominems?
In my work environment I expect my coworkers to be able to engage with substance and would be very disappointed if they refused to look at something because it came from someone “problematic”.
I very much appreciate that this whole thread is suffused with the assumption that interlocutors are making their arguments from stupidity or illiteracy.
> posting him in any but a right-wing community is going to be a troll for reactions
This is an extreme shifting of the overton window and cult behavior that excommunicates liberals from the left. Joe Rogan himself is on the left, he has mostly liberal views, he wanted to vote for Bernie Sanders. But because he's heterodox and talks to the "other", he's a sinner who must be cast out.
Isn't there a difference between someone on the other side within the democratic political spectrum, and someone on the other side wanting to overthrow said democracy?
And yes, there's people outside of the democratic political spectrum both on the right and the left side. In Germany they currently march together ("Querdenker").
However, at least according to the FBI, the right-wing extremists are the larger problem right now.
Not really. This is only understandable if you subscribe to the idea that "not giving someone a platform" is a desirable and effective way to combat bad ideas.
I think Joe Rogan has said in the past that he just considers Alex Jones a friend and just enjoys having him on the podcast. Also, the guy has had literally thousands of guests on his podcast, including Bernie Sanders or whoever these woke people presumably agree with. And even then, sometimes him and his guests have been drunk or high. Do that to anyone and it's certain you'll find one or two clips among the tens of thousands of hours where someone says something that someone else doesn't like. Big deal. I honestly think one of the reason podcasts are so popular these days is that they're longform and authentic, unlike the media or even political debates, where it's more about soundbites and zingers.
I also totally agree that the best way to combat so-called bad ideas is to talk about them and debate them, not deplatform, as if you're so smart to know what's good or bad for people, and the people themselves are too stupid and will be easily manipulated and believe a bad idea.
Anyways, that's neither here or there when I'm literally sharing a podcast about Signal which has nothing to do with one guest he's had on way in the past. I think a lot of the comments i got were just poor control of emotions and some virtue signalling.
> I also totally agree that the best way to combat so-called bad ideas is to talk about them and debate them, not deplatform
I would like it to be that way. However, I've seen over the last 10 years (at least in Germany) that it just does not seem to work. Deplatforming at least limits the ability of extremists to reach more people, even though it seems to make the people already in that corner to become even more radical.
> as if you're so smart to know what's good or bad for people, and the people themselves are too stupid and will be easily manipulated and believe a bad idea.
Well we are stupid and we are easily manipulated, unfortunately. And that's why as a society could (and imo should) decide that we won't expose ourselves to certain kinds of propaganda. This is not a random process of censoring people we don't like - this has to do with legislation and courts enforcing those laws.
> I think Joe Rogan has said in the past that he just considers Alex Jones a friend and just enjoys having him on the podcast. Also, the guy has had literally thousands of guests on his podcast, including Bernie Sanders or whoever these woke people presumably agree with.
He’s also had Colion Noir (a black, ex-lawyer, gun rights supporter) on his show a few times, and seemingly supports gun rights. He’s also a gun owner. He’s got quite an interesting and divisive way with both sides.
Its not necessarily a good or effective way, but the only one we got, as it seems. It definitely works better than discussing those ideas. That only works with people who do not actively lie to win that discussion. If one side does not care about the truth, discussions are pointless. Brain are not computers. Giving such people a platform and allowing them to repeat their lies unfortunately does lead to more people subscribing to those lies, just because they get repeated often enough.
Note that I do not talk about "the government" doing this. I am just talking about some people choosing not to give other people a platform.
This is a fine argument for censorship in general. Sadly, we have centuries of evidence that such an approach is ultimately futile. If you concede that censorship "definitely works better than discussion", you're ultimately conceding the debate.
A far better approach is to draw a hard red line and not allow anyone to cross it - e.g. if you're advocating for ending democracy or free speech - no democracy or free speech for you. Otherwise, you gotta find a way to defeat bad ideas without trying to shut them out. If you attempt to censor (use whatever euphemisms you prefer, but that's all it is), you'll fail, and do irreparable damage to your own arguments in the process.
But who then decides if someone crossed that red line? And what if that decision is being done in bad faith?
Again, I am not talking about censorship by the government. I am talking about some people deciding its not worth to listen to some other people, and therefore not giving them a platform? Isn't that my free choice - you can talk freely, but I can just not listen to you?
Isn't what you propose - taking away the right to free speech - far worse than censorship? Would you jail people if they still speak freely after they crossed that red line?
Honestly if a bunch of people wanted to censor someone I would want to listen to that person even more.
I also think you’re kinda playing Devil’s advocate a bit much here. We have red lines in conversations already. E.g. advocating violence against another group of people is a red line for a lot of people. E.g. Advocating the superiority of one particular race is usually a red line for people.
> Honestly if a bunch of people wanted to censor someone I would want to listen to that person even more.
Sure, you can do that. For me, it would probably depend on who did the "censoring" (see below).
> I also think you’re kinda playing Devil’s advocate a bit much here.
Wait, who's the devil here? Seriously, I have no idea what you mean.
Again: it am not talking about censorship by the government, I am simply talking about not listening to certain people. For me, in Germany, I would for example categorically refuse to listen to and engage in discussions with voters of the "AfD" party (right-wing party, with one leader that you can officially call a fascist based on a court decision) or the so called "Querdenker" people.
You're basically arguing for what totalitarian regimes do when they censor any speech they deem undesirable.
I'm sure you will reply that the type of speech you want to censor is actually bad but who decides that? You?
Freedom of speech without significant negative consequences is one of the main principles of a democratic society. As long as the speech in question is not promoting violence it should be allowed.
The fact that so many liberals now think that it's desirable to have consequences for expressing a wrong opinion is mind boggling and scary. That is a completely illiberal stance. It's also stupid because it somehow misses the point of freedom of speech being a principle. What if these woke people faced significant negative consequences for expressing THEIR opinions?
> You must know that Joe Rogan is a polarizing figure and posting him in any but a right-wing community is going to be a troll for reactions. That doesn’t strike me as “bizarre,” it strikes me as the obvious outcome for your choice.
This is interesting to me, because I found out about Joe Rogan from some liberal friends that were recommending him. Doesn’t Joe label himself as. liberal? Why does the left hate Joe?
Do they? All I see are a small vocal minority hellbent on tearing the fabric of society apart, amplified by the media who make money from pitting us against each other.
Downvote button is not just for disagreeing guys. I’m not even allowed to downvote because I don’t have enough karma but it seems like those who are deemed worthy to are abusing it.
Are you sure those people are really your friends and not just people you hang out with? IMHO real friends wouldn’t use passive aggressive tactics like that.
Since last year, I've stopped using social media like FB. When the summer came around, my friends were posting political stuff online and noticed I wasn't interacting with it. My phone would then blow up with messages along the theme of: "are you showing your real self by not supporting x?".