7 ms·

Discrimination on the basis of political stance is bigotry. There is no two ways about this.

Delenda 12y ago
Political stance is one thing, but he then specifically took action to ruin their lives. They're not acting based on against what his stance is, but on the actions he specifically took that personally and demonstrably hurt them.
- transitionality 12y ago
  They're acting based on what his stance is. The actions can't exist independently of the stance. The differentiation that you're artificially trying to conjure does not exist.
drhayes9 12y ago
Discrimination of what kind? They are not publishing an app in an app store. Are they discriminating against Mozilla? Are they blocking Mozilla browsers from their site? Are people being persecuted, imprisoned, or killed for using Firefox? Are they working to put Eich in an internment camp based on his beliefs? The word "bigotry" is a very big stick to swing against two people who could be killed in many parts of the world based on who they are. Bigotry implies a more systemic persecution than the economic decision they've made here. By way of comparison, I'm not "discriminating" against Sony based on my boycott of their products for pushing out rootkits to their customers.
- transitionality 12y ago
  They are actively working to disenfranchise Brendan Eich of his employment. They are doing this on the basis of his political stance. This is bigotry. They are bigots. What's worse, they're hypocritical bigots, because they're trying to pass this off as some sort of anti-bigotry stance. All social justice is like this. It breaks down under the merest of scrutinty.
  - drhayes9 12y ago
    That's a very reductionist point of view that doesn't seem useful as an intellectual tool. Bigotry is not just a description of actions people take but the context in which they take them. Eich, in the context of this specific economic transaction, doesn't belong to a marginalized group. These men who are withdrawing their app do. Eich has taken direct action against them and they are responding. In this case, I believe they could be considered to be defending themselves by trying to deprive people who want to do them harm economic opportunity. I'm pretty much okay with that. So, yeah, I guess you could say they are bigots. But that train of thought doesn't seem to me to place this situation in any useful context other than "all social justice causes are bad". Am I missing something?
    - transitionality 12y ago
      The social justice warrior definition of discrimination is itself bigoted, because it claims it's impossible to be bigoted against men, white people, hetero people, etc.
  - wpietri 12y ago
    I believe Eich has and will continue to have his franchise. Voting, you see, being one of the civil rights guaranteed to us. Like marriage, it turns out. Being a fancy CEO, though? That's not a civil right. Especially not if attempting to deprive gay people of their civil rights makes it hard to perform an important function of that fancy CEO job: the recruitment and retention of staff.
    - transitionality 12y ago
      Not being offended isn't a civil right, either.
  - zanny 12y ago
    > They are doing this on the basis of his political stance. They are doing this because he directly funded initiatives that withhold equal rights from them and treat them as less than human. You can hold views, even as CEOs, I don't agree with. Hell, you could donate to the anti-funds of almost anything I believe, as long as it is an equal battlefield. But civil rights aren't about ideology, they are literally whether or not you recognize other humans as being humans and deserving the same rights as you.
wpietri 12y ago
Huh. White power is a political stance. One widely reviled. So is antisemitism. So if I understand you rightly, you're basically saying that everybody is a bigot on a variety of formerly-controversial issues. I guess if you want to define the word that way, sure. In which case, I'm proud to be bigoted against racists. But I think words are more useful when they don't include 99% of the population.
- transitionality 12y ago
  Every social justice warrior is a bigot by definition. Thankfully, your kind is a very tiny percentage of the population.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
    - transitionality 12y ago
      You're kidding, right? This thread is full of SJWs. And you're certainly not anti-SJW.
  - wpietri 12y ago
    I guess 87% of the population is pretty tiny in your world: http://www.gallup.com/poll/163697/approve-marriage-blacks-whites.aspx http://www.gallup.com/poll/163697/approve-marriage-blacks-wh... Also, I think it's awesome I get to qualify as a warrior by sitting in a cafe and pointing out basic legal facts to people. Pew pew! I'm a warrior! 'Scuse me while I go beat my chest and shop for bandoliers.
    - transitionality 12y ago
      That link is completely irrelevant. Social justice warriors are defined by the bigoted views they hold that they try to pass off as anti-bigotry, such as the view that men, white people and hetero people can't be discriminated against.
alexqgb 12y ago
Uh, no. Political views are - presumably - matters of choice. Also, they're prone to regular change. In both regards, they are categorically different from distinctions of gender, race, orientation, etc.
- transitionality 12y ago
  Getting a sex change operation is a matter of choice, too.
  - alexqgb 12y ago
    Regular change. Can you not read?
    - transitionality 12y ago
      That is not true for the vast majority of people. The vast majority of people are not flip-floppers.

Political stance is one thing, but he then specifically took action to ruin their lives. They're not acting based on against what his stance is, but on the actions he specifically took that personally and demonstrably hurt them.

transitionality 12y ago
They're acting based on what his stance is. The actions can't exist independently of the stance. The differentiation that you're artificially trying to conjure does not exist.

drhayes9 12y ago

Discrimination of what kind? They are not publishing an app in an app store. Are they discriminating against Mozilla? Are they blocking Mozilla browsers from their site? Are people being persecuted, imprisoned, or killed for using Firefox? Are they working to put Eich in an internment camp based on his beliefs? The word "bigotry" is a very big stick to swing against two people who could be killed in many parts of the world based on who they are. Bigotry implies a more systemic persecution than the economic decision they've made here. By way of comparison, I'm not "discriminating" against Sony based on my boycott of their products for pushing out rootkits to their customers.

transitionality 12y ago
They are actively working to disenfranchise Brendan Eich of his employment. They are doing this on the basis of his political stance. This is bigotry. They are bigots. What's worse, they're hypocritical bigots, because they're trying to pass this off as some sort of anti-bigotry stance. All social justice is like this. It breaks down under the merest of scrutinty.
- drhayes9 12y ago
  That's a very reductionist point of view that doesn't seem useful as an intellectual tool. Bigotry is not just a description of actions people take but the context in which they take them. Eich, in the context of this specific economic transaction, doesn't belong to a marginalized group. These men who are withdrawing their app do. Eich has taken direct action against them and they are responding. In this case, I believe they could be considered to be defending themselves by trying to deprive people who want to do them harm economic opportunity. I'm pretty much okay with that. So, yeah, I guess you could say they are bigots. But that train of thought doesn't seem to me to place this situation in any useful context other than "all social justice causes are bad". Am I missing something?
  - transitionality 12y ago
    The social justice warrior definition of discrimination is itself bigoted, because it claims it's impossible to be bigoted against men, white people, hetero people, etc.
- wpietri 12y ago
  I believe Eich has and will continue to have his franchise. Voting, you see, being one of the civil rights guaranteed to us. Like marriage, it turns out. Being a fancy CEO, though? That's not a civil right. Especially not if attempting to deprive gay people of their civil rights makes it hard to perform an important function of that fancy CEO job: the recruitment and retention of staff.
  - transitionality 12y ago
    Not being offended isn't a civil right, either.
- zanny 12y ago
  > They are doing this on the basis of his political stance. They are doing this because he directly funded initiatives that withhold equal rights from them and treat them as less than human. You can hold views, even as CEOs, I don't agree with. Hell, you could donate to the anti-funds of almost anything I believe, as long as it is an equal battlefield. But civil rights aren't about ideology, they are literally whether or not you recognize other humans as being humans and deserving the same rights as you.

wpietri 12y ago

Huh. White power is a political stance. One widely reviled. So is antisemitism. So if I understand you rightly, you're basically saying that everybody is a bigot on a variety of formerly-controversial issues. I guess if you want to define the word that way, sure. In which case, I'm proud to be bigoted against racists. But I think words are more useful when they don't include 99% of the population.

transitionality 12y ago
Every social justice warrior is a bigot by definition. Thankfully, your kind is a very tiny percentage of the population.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
  - transitionality 12y ago
    You're kidding, right? This thread is full of SJWs. And you're certainly not anti-SJW.
- wpietri 12y ago
  I guess 87% of the population is pretty tiny in your world: http://www.gallup.com/poll/163697/approve-marriage-blacks-whites.aspx http://www.gallup.com/poll/163697/approve-marriage-blacks-wh... Also, I think it's awesome I get to qualify as a warrior by sitting in a cafe and pointing out basic legal facts to people. Pew pew! I'm a warrior! 'Scuse me while I go beat my chest and shop for bandoliers.
  - transitionality 12y ago
    That link is completely irrelevant. Social justice warriors are defined by the bigoted views they hold that they try to pass off as anti-bigotry, such as the view that men, white people and hetero people can't be discriminated against.

alexqgb 12y ago

Uh, no. Political views are - presumably - matters of choice. Also, they're prone to regular change. In both regards, they are categorically different from distinctions of gender, race, orientation, etc.

transitionality 12y ago
Getting a sex change operation is a matter of choice, too.
- alexqgb 12y ago
  Regular change. Can you not read?
  - transitionality 12y ago
    That is not true for the vast majority of people. The vast majority of people are not flip-floppers.