In a previous post, I summarized a Hillary-voting anti-development friend’s position with
1) immigration into a nation of 325 million is good and needs to be supported with passionate political effort
2) immigration into a town of 13,444 is bad and needs to be fought with passionate political effort
Maybe he can get hired at Google, based on “James Damore sues Google, alleging intolerance of white male conservatives” (Guardian):
The suit also alleges that Google maintains a “secret” blacklist of conservative authors who are banned from being on campus. Curtis Yarvin, a “neoreactionary” who blogs under the name Mencius Moldbug, was allegedly removed from the campus by security after being invited to lunch. The plaintiffs subsequently learned, it is claimed in the suit, that Alex Jones, the InfoWars conspiracy theorist, and Theodore Beale, an “alt-right” blogger known as VoxDay, were also banned from the campus.
The suit will likely reignite the culture wars that have swirled around the tech industry since the election of Donald Trump. Many liberals within the tech industry have pressured their employers to take a stand against Trump policies, such as the Muslim travel ban, and companies have struggled to decide the extent to which they will allow the resurgent movement of white nationalists to use their platforms to organize.
So permanent immigration of folks from countries where a desire to wage jihad is common (as estimated by Americans who don’t speak the language and don’t know anything about the culture!) is good. But lunchtime immigration of people who might offend the snowflake brogrammers is bad.
[Separately, I’m not sure how any Trump policy can be characterized by a neutral journalist as a “Muslim travel ban.” Countries with the largest Muslim populations, such as Indonesia and Pakistan, were not on the list, were they? Even if the ban had been implemented as proposed, approximately 1.7 billion Muslims would have been exempt from it.]
From a legal angle, I don’t see how this can be a class action lawsuit. Can there be more than a handful of Google employees who will admit to not supporting Hillary Clinton? And in a nation that lacks coherent political ideologies or any significant number of politicians who support an ideology (rather than ad hoc methods of getting reelected), what method could be used to identify a person as “conservative”? If gender is fluid, how could “males” be identified to join the class? What happens if they switch their gender IDs over the years of litigation? And finally what does it mean to be definitively “white”?
Readers: What’s your favorite part of this new chapter in the Google Heretic Saga?