Agreed about Eich. However I would never extend that to a whole country.
In addition to the episode bridling against my British sense of tolerance, this is I wrote on HN at the time about the boycott:
>I think the whole thing is sickening. Why? Because there are CEOs and companies that you and I use and love that are not boycotted. That are not hounded. That support the murder of people around the world. That support the exploitation of people. That pollute the environment. That invade the privacy of people's lives. That make the world a worse place. That we and our governments support.
These are the targets that should be addressed.
Maybe not your opinion, but giving campaign contributions to bigoted causes would be considered making the world a worse place to many. All of this is morally relative. Maybe 15 years ago he would have just been seen as someone with a politically conservative slant, but we're moving closer and closer to a society that sees him as someone with bigoted views. While I agree that there are unfortunately much more evil CEOs out there than Eich, it's silly to say "oh, well, there are worse guys out there, so let's let the moderately-morally-reprehensible ones go."
First, just because there are big problems doesn't mean we can't address smaller problems. Even though tons upon tons of pollution are dumped into the environment every day, I still brush my teeth.
Second: What if Eich gave money specifically to prevent you from marrying the person that you love? Pretty awful, right?
Yet it is up to him to decide what his personal beliefs and opinions. Having lived in the US for the past 6 months, I can totally relate to the author of the article on some stuff.
Americans consider themselves to be very tolerant and mindful of minorities. In reality the political correctness has reached a point where if someone even remotely seems like offending any kind of minorities, they will get blasted and flamed like there's no tomorrow. It doesn't even matter how serious it was, when it happened, why it happened - that person is just going to get OWNED. I think the case of Eich illustrates this quite well.
I mean the stuff I can joke around about back home is considered mostly off-limits and politically incorrect in the US. I still get weird looks from time to time when playfully joking about topics that are not considered offensive or sensitive in most places besides the US :)
You guys (in the US) are just overdoing it, need to take chill pill at times imho.
If I'm to understand the author, he doesn't want to live in the US because there's no "nice short walk" option at the Grand Canyon and because Brenden Eich quit his job?
If that's all it takes, he's not going to last long in Britain or in whatever country he lands next.
This guy doesn't have anything new or insightful to add to the Brendon Eich case. The rest of his argument why he doesn't want to live in America is just silliness (commentary on Mustang cars and exercise routines).
If you arrive at Yosemite or the Grand Canyon or whatever, there is no pleasant mile-long stroll on offer: instead you have two options — put on hiking gear and walk through bear-infested woods for three days — or else sit and look at the view from the car park.
Lots of mile long strolls at the parks. Of course at those two main sites you'd better like to be around your fellow man. And it doesn't take long to hike down the Grand Canyon and back up, just don't go all the way to the bottom.
I tend not to think that this was a case of something intrinsically American. Public shaming on the internet might quickly be becoming the national pastime, but its hardly exclusive to the US.
If a homophobe being driven to quit his public position because the media is "so deferential to minorities" is your deciding issue, I hope the door doesn't hit you on the way out. The urges that I get to leave the country are due to a surplus of privileged, solipsistic upper-middle class people destroying the place in the name of saving a few bucks on their taxes, or avoiding having to send their kids to a public school, or some other minor inconvenience. Your absence will help with that.
I'm going to make an easy assumption that the author is from the exact same demographic group as Eich, so the controversy over him managed to penetrate the author's fog of not noticing the important issues that are a matter of life or death to millions with the fairly trivial matter of a short-term CEO becoming embarrassed.
edit: Eich seems like a nice guy, so when I call him a homophobe, I'm just saying something factual - not trying to attack his character. My grandmother is a homophobe and I still love her.
Seriously, though: Removing limits to political spending, shutting down the public schools, crumbling infrastructure, universal surveillance, largest prison population in the world, the situation of racial minorities and integration backsliding rapidly, massive unemployment/underemployment, college reaching unaffordable levels, the number one reason for bankruptcy being health care costs from illness, a newly-appointed CEO who donated to defeat gay marriage in California being driven to quit by people who were upset about it.
10 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 29.3 ms ] threadIn addition to the episode bridling against my British sense of tolerance, this is I wrote on HN at the time about the boycott:
>I think the whole thing is sickening. Why? Because there are CEOs and companies that you and I use and love that are not boycotted. That are not hounded. That support the murder of people around the world. That support the exploitation of people. That pollute the environment. That invade the privacy of people's lives. That make the world a worse place. That we and our governments support. These are the targets that should be addressed.
Maybe not your opinion, but giving campaign contributions to bigoted causes would be considered making the world a worse place to many. All of this is morally relative. Maybe 15 years ago he would have just been seen as someone with a politically conservative slant, but we're moving closer and closer to a society that sees him as someone with bigoted views. While I agree that there are unfortunately much more evil CEOs out there than Eich, it's silly to say "oh, well, there are worse guys out there, so let's let the moderately-morally-reprehensible ones go."
Second: What if Eich gave money specifically to prevent you from marrying the person that you love? Pretty awful, right?
I mean the stuff I can joke around about back home is considered mostly off-limits and politically incorrect in the US. I still get weird looks from time to time when playfully joking about topics that are not considered offensive or sensitive in most places besides the US :)
You guys (in the US) are just overdoing it, need to take chill pill at times imho.
If that's all it takes, he's not going to last long in Britain or in whatever country he lands next.
This guy doesn't have anything new or insightful to add to the Brendon Eich case. The rest of his argument why he doesn't want to live in America is just silliness (commentary on Mustang cars and exercise routines).
If you arrive at Yosemite or the Grand Canyon or whatever, there is no pleasant mile-long stroll on offer: instead you have two options — put on hiking gear and walk through bear-infested woods for three days — or else sit and look at the view from the car park.
Lots of mile long strolls at the parks. Of course at those two main sites you'd better like to be around your fellow man. And it doesn't take long to hike down the Grand Canyon and back up, just don't go all the way to the bottom.
I'm going to make an easy assumption that the author is from the exact same demographic group as Eich, so the controversy over him managed to penetrate the author's fog of not noticing the important issues that are a matter of life or death to millions with the fairly trivial matter of a short-term CEO becoming embarrassed.
edit: Eich seems like a nice guy, so when I call him a homophobe, I'm just saying something factual - not trying to attack his character. My grandmother is a homophobe and I still love her.
Seriously, though: Removing limits to political spending, shutting down the public schools, crumbling infrastructure, universal surveillance, largest prison population in the world, the situation of racial minorities and integration backsliding rapidly, massive unemployment/underemployment, college reaching unaffordable levels, the number one reason for bankruptcy being health care costs from illness, a newly-appointed CEO who donated to defeat gay marriage in California being driven to quit by people who were upset about it.