But now imagine a place where such kids are a little older and not only have their way, they have the ability to influence one of the most powerful corporations on Earth.
For a multi-billion dollar outfit that has so much control over information, whose biases are expressed in the algorithms at the heart of its search engine, and is neck deep in state collusion from censorship to demonetization, it's pretty scary to learn what the culture at Google is like.
With its heavily progressive (like, crazily progressive) views, it's no surprise that anything resembling a conservative viewpoint is punished at Google, as a matter of policy.
In August last year, Google programmer James Damore wrote an internal memo that was eventually leaked. It sparked a firestorm of controversy and has been called, among other things, an "antisocial, sexist, racist screed". If you actually read the memo (and can think rationally), it isn't any of those things at all. In fact, it was well-written, well-thought out, and factually accurate.
Damore sought to encourage discussion into how to include women in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields without resorting to illegal business practices. Not too much to ask right? Well, it is if you are a radical left SJW that finds offense at anything which challenges your beliefs. Ultimately, that memo lead to Damore's termination at Google.
Damore (and another fired Google worker, David Gudeman) recently hit back with a class action lawsuit against Google. What's more, their complaint is available for all to see - all 161 pages of it. The document is brimming with examples of the kind of vitriol and hate that was thrown at Damore and others at Google.
Their complaint serves as a great exposé of the culture there - and probably other tech companies - where double-standards rule, and madness reigns.
James Damore
Damore's memo did not come out of the blue. The work that went into it began with his observations from attending weekly 'TGIF' meetings. In one meeting, participants were told, "Google's racial and gender preferences in hiring were not up for debate, because this was morally and economically the best thing to do for Google."
He was surprised by that statement since he "believed that blatant gender preferences and quotas were inconsistent with US and California discrimination laws." And he was right. Gender preferences and quotas are discriminatory and considered "unlawful employment practices."
He also attended a 'Diversity and Inclusion Summit' where discussions were held about how Google could increase diversity and what policies could achieve that. At that meeting Google proposed "treating preferred categories of people" differently during the hiring process by providing extra interviews, and putting applicants "into a more welcoming environment" based on their race or gender. The Google presenters also discussed putting 'diverse' individuals into "high-priority queues so that they were more likely to be hired, and hired faster."
Again, these types of policies are discriminatory. Damore voiced his concerns at the summit and was directed by its presenters to provide written feedback on the program, at which point he drafted the memo.
Damore saw that something wasn't right and tried to open a dialogue. He shared the memo internally on 'Google docs', where any other employee could read it and comment on it. He also tried to get Google HR involved, but received no answer despite repeated attempts to set up a meeting to discuss the memo. As the memo became more widely read, it was eventually leaked to the public, then went viral.
At that point, the poop hit the fan and he started receiving threats and insults from his coworkers, with some demanding that he be fired. Those who insulted him, instead of being reprimanded for unprofessional behavior, were instead rewarded. Damore saved many of these posts by Google coworkers and included them in his lawsuit filing:
The trolls came out to, guess what? To tell Damore he's a troll!
Looks like somebody got triggered
Zero tolerance for intolerance, literally a rallying call during the French revolution
This one gets an award for standing up against science and rational thought
The second plaintiff in the class action lawsuit is David Gudeman. On November 9, 2016, a few days after Trump was elected, Sarmad Gilani, a Google employee, posted the following message on a Dory thread (an internal forum where Google employees can ask questions that other Google employees can respond to):
"As someone already targeted by the FBI (including at work) for being a Muslim, I'm worried for my personal safety and liberty. Will Google take a public stand to defend minorities and use its influence, or just issue the usual politically nuanced statements about our values."Gudeman responded skeptically to Gilani's claim that he was targeted solely due to his religion by asking,
"In the administration of the most pro-Muslim president in history you were targeted just for being a Muslim? Why didn't you file a civil rights suit? The Justice Department would take your side if it really happened."Gudeman further stated he searched Gilani's claim of being profiled, and found "zero evidence for the claim that [Gilani] was targeted just for being a Muslim." Gudeman further suggested that the FBI may have had valid motives for looking into Gilani because he had recently visited Pakistan.
In response to Gudeman's input, a fellow Google employee became hostile and stated that she "had to escalate this thread," meaning that she reported it to Google HR.
On or around December 5, 2016, Google HR contacted Gudeman to discuss his comments about Gilani's post. Google HR stated that Gudeman had accused Gilani of terrorism based on Gilani's religion, and that this was unacceptable. As a result of Gudeman's 'accusations', Google told him that he was being fired.
Twisting words
"...the point of this document is to disallow any defense at all that a man might make when some woman complains about bias. There is no defense. The woman is always right. The man has no alternative but to submit to her superior moral position. We have a word for that attitude; it's called 'sexism'."That wasn't well received by Burchett, so she too decided to 'escalate' Gudeman by reporting his transgression to HR.
In the aftermath of Trump's election, when many at Google apparently went into meltdown, Gudeman said:
Gasp! How dare he! I'm just so offended!
Google punishes other employees who raise similar concerns
Besides Damore and Gudeman, there were many others at Google who could not raise concerns without being harassed, marginalized or even threatened. Most were afraid to speak up due to the backlash they'd receive if they did. In one instance, when an issue was brought before management, "Google HR made excuses for the progressive activists, and waved away the misconduct, thus ensuring nothing was done about the systemic problem." The same employee tried again to raise the issue and ended up being targeted for harassment.
Google management encouraged staff to engage in 'social pecking' against anyone speaking out against the political climate
In 2016 a Google employee at a group lunch brought up concerns about intolerance of those who hold conservative views. Notably, that "employees whose politics closely aligned with the senior management's views were receiving favorable treatment, while political dissidents were unfairly denied promotions."
One of the managers at the lunch didn't like that and went on the attack. First he accused the employee of an "illegal 'doxxing' campaign to publish an individual's personal information on the internet for the purpose of harassment." That turned out to be false after the employee provided proof that that wasn't the case.
To further harass and undermine him, the manager then bragged about his meeting with that employee's manager on the company mailing list, which is visible to all employees. In addition, he threatened members of the 'conservatives@' mailing list by saying he will get "Employee Relations to comb through the mailing list archives to nitpick old postings for possible Code of Conduct violations." He also threatened to apply Google's "employee handbook speech code to communications taking place between friends on non-work forums, off the clock." Later in 2017, this manager also threatened employees supporting Damore and his memo with litigation and termination for speaking to bloggers. All this was reported to Google HR, and they did absolutely nothing about it.
Below are some more internal posts that show how Trump 'supporters' (really, anyone who is not fully embracing SJW ideology) are on the receiving end of hate and ridicule at Google.
Very reasonable request. Except that, at Google, Trump voters are just not tolerated.
Even wanting to raise a child in a traditional family that 'follows biological norms' is apparently frowned upon. One employee posted in a Google thread:
"If I had a child, I would teach him/her traditional gender roles and patriarchy from a very young age. That's the hardest thing to fix later, and our degenerate society constantly pushes the wrong message."To which Google HR responded:
"We did not find that this post, on its face, violated any of Google's policies, but your choice of words could suggest that you were advocating for a system in which men work outside the home and women do not, or that you were advocating for rigid adherence to gender identity at birth. We trust that neither is what you intended to say. We are providing you with this feedback so that you can better understand how some Googlers interpreted your statements, and so that you are better equipped to ensure that Google is a place in which all Googlers are able to reach their full potential."No, she intended to say exactly that. And there's nothing wrong it - unless you work at Google, where any 'googler' suggesting anything along conservative lines gets you a creepy Orwellian response from HR.
Google Endorses Blacklists
Google management has no qualms about endorsing blacklists of employees who hold conservative views, with the purpose being "to encourage and coordinate the sabotage of promotions, performance reviews, and employment opportunities for those with conservative viewpoints." They even suggest that staff be blacklisted outside the company. For example:
S/he should put him/herself on that list
Google Keeps Secret Blacklists of Conservative Authors
It's not just their own 'conservative-minded' employees they blacklist. In addition to Curtis Yarvin, conservative personalities like Alex Jones and Theodore Beale are blacklisted. A Google employee asked if they could be removed from the list. Instead, Google made it so that it was not possible to see who was on the list anymore. In this example, Curtis Yarvin arrived at the Google campus for a lunch meeting with an employee. His presence triggered a silent alarm and he was escorted off the property by security.
Many 'googlers' with conservative views are either explicitly threatened with termination by other workers, or intimidated by those calling for their termination. These activities were also reported to HR, which again did nothing about them.
Among other 'disdained' groups at Google are Caucasian males. For example, one Caucasian male employee made a comment regarding a 'Diversity Town Hall' meeting and was attacked and belittled for it in this series of posts:
Yes, you read that correctly; 'microaggression'
Stating the obvious is apparently 'troll-bullshit'
Even the male employee's manager got in on the action
That's the kind of thinking that led to the atrocities committed by the Nazis
Google has apparently no capacity for responding to logical arguments. One employee complained about an offensive post to Google HR, saying it violated the Google Code of Conduct. The post stated:
"If you put a group of 40-something white men in a room together and tell them to come up with something creative or innovative, they'll come back and tell you how enjoyable the process was, and how they want to do it again, but they come up with fuck-all as a result!"Google responded:
"Given the context of the post and that [the employee's] main point is to highlight that it is helpful to have diverse perspectives, it doesn't appear that the post to [sic] violates our policies."The employee, being confused about this nonsensical statement, then responded:
Google's 'Diversity' Policies Prevent Internal Mobility
In another example of Google's discriminatory 'diversity' policies, a qualified employee looking to get a position on another team was not selected because he, being a white male, didn't help meet the criteria for their mandatory quotas (that of being a woman and/or non-Caucasian). In addition, the employee's former director "initiated a 'Diversity Team Kickoff' with the intent to freeze headcount so that teams could find diversity candidates to help fill the empty roles." So despite being qualified for the role, he was denied opportunity since he wasn't considered 'diverse'.
He eventually did get a position on another team in the 'Ads and Commerce Product Area', and did well in it. However, it wasn't ideal since his strengths were in coding, so he decided to reach out to Stephen Gillet of the Google X team, who was "receptive to the idea of re-engaging with the Google employee for the purposes of transferring him over," and put him in touch with Will Robinson, the hiring manager of Google X.
Around this time, when Damore's memo was going viral, the employee commented in support of the memo shortly before his going on vacation:
"Thank you for raising this important issue James. All too often I believe this subject is portrayed very one-sidedly here at Google, and with real consequences for those who dare to question the dominant narrative."That's when things went downhill for this white male employee.
Shortly after his return, he was told by his manager that he was in "danger of not meeting expectations," and a couple of weeks later, that he needed to "deliver a sizeable project in the final quarter of the year with 'no room for failure'." He then received an email a few days later from Robinson, the Google X hiring manager, stating that "after a lot of thought and discussion, I've come to the conclusion that the right fit isn't there for you and our team at this time."
About a month later, despite previously being told by his manager that he was meeting expectations, he received a 'Needs Improvement' rating. Since it was his second such rating, despite being with Google 10 years and not having previously received any written feedback, he was placed on a 'Performance Improvement Plan', which is one step short of being fired.
Google Allows Incitement to Violence
Even the open promotion of violence against conservatives gets a pass at Google, while if you did something like that against a liberal, there's no question you'd be gone.
Such bigotry and discrimination would be grounds for dismissal in most organizations. It certainly wouldn't have been tolerated anywhere I have worked. But in Google's case, firing those employees would hurt its diversity quotas (and its ideology), so instead they're given a free pass. Any member of staff calling the organization out on its inherently discriminatory double-standards is instead "violat[ing] their code of conduct and perpetuating gender stereotypes." Google seems to be the worst offender, though it doesn't look like things are much better at Twitter.
Each time policy involving quotas is enacted to 'protect' people based on race or sex, unintended consequences result in an increase in harmful discrimination. For another example, look at the rising number of attacks on teachers in US schools. That is at least in part due to racially-based discipline quotas. Multiple factors cause things to be the way they are, and quota-based policies sacrifice all of those factors for the sake of 'equal numbers', utterly ignoring the merits of the individuals concerned or the context of their situation.
How did the Google behemoth become so riddled with identity politics that it pervades all levels of management? The organization embraced the de facto ideology of far-Left activists and turned Google corporate culture into a cesspool of intolerance, hypocrisy and wastefulness.
They want diversity of people, but not diversity of thought, or ideas (so much for innovation). They want equal outcome and equal opportunity (you can't have both). Diversity implies differences, so expecting equality of outcome becomes unrealistic. They want tolerance of others, yet show none themselves because group identity has taken over and, being so identified with it, they claim victimhood, yet have now become the victimizer.
Prepare for change and stop fascism in the system.
but it seems the Besserwisser snowflakes will get it the hard way to learn.