“No politics” Coinbase rolls out feature to promote crypto-friendly politicians

https://web3isgoinggreat.com/single/no-politics-at-work-coinbase-rolls-out-a-feature-to-promote-crypto-friendly-politicians

by latexr • 4 years ago

52 34 4 years ago

web3isgoinggreat.com

purjolok• 4 years ago

The "No politics" at Coinbase refers to topics outside of the company's core mission. Regardless of what one thinks of lobbying, seeking beneficial regulation does not contradict the spirit of "no politics at work".

gkoberger• 4 years ago

I get your point, but I think it's a convenient one. I, personally, wouldn't be comfortable working at a company that is actively promoting a politician I fundamentally disagree with, and being told I can't say anything because that's "politics".

autokad• 4 years ago

I, personally, wouldn't be comfortable working at a company that is actively promoting a politician I fundamentally disagree with

First off, if you are working for coinbase and you can't handle it supporting politicians that aren't trying to regulate crypto out of existence, then you have no business working there.

2ndly, why? are you so defined by your politics? 99% of companies donate to politicians I fundamentally disagree with. I guess its easy for you to be that way and hard for me because you have choice and I don't.

3rdly, For coinbase, they don't want people discussing politics at work. I wish my company had this policy, as I am sick and tired of people talking about politics.

throwaway894345• 4 years ago

That's fine that you don't feel comfortable working for such a company; I might not either. That said, I'm not being paid to espouse my personal political opinions, I'm paid to further the interests of the company (and if I can't do that in good conscience, then I should probably find new work).

jhp123• 4 years ago

in our representative system, there is no practical way to separate out political activism to one topic. What I mean is this: if there are two candidates in a race, of whom candidate A supports crypto and opposes trans healthcare; whereas candidate B opposes crypto and supports trans healthcare; then there are only two outcomes to the race. A wins or B does. If you support A "because of crypto" then you are also supporting their position on trans healthcare. You are taking a position on trans healthcare, even if that position is just "I don't care enough about it to change my material support for candidate A". The policy is saying that Coinbase can support candidate A in spite of their trans healthcare stance, while you as an employee can not support candidate B because of their trans healthcare stance - an imaginary distinction with no material political impact whatsoever.

pcai2• 4 years ago

while you as an employee can not support candidate B because of their trans healthcare stance - an imaginary distinction with no material political impact whatsoever.

To be fair, coinbase's opinion is actually that an employee cannot support candidate B WITH COINBASE'S MONEY.

daniel-cussen• 4 years ago

At first blush this would be gross--from the perspective of a student like straight outta high school--but these days? Much lower bar.

throw_m239339• 4 years ago

"No politics" means "no partisan identity activism on the clock" like asking a company to get involved in "Black Lives Matters", taking positions about the war in Ukraine beyond nationwide sanctions, or displaying a rainbow flag during "pride month".

Lobbying politicians further the interests of the company obviously doesn't count.

babyshake• 4 years ago

Maybe I've just drank too much of the kool aid, but it seems that prohibiting things like the equivalent of wearing a rainbow pride shirt or Ukraine flag pin is too much. If you don't want politics - or for that matter, discussing the latest Marvel movie trailer - to distract from company business, then why not just make that you policy instead of banning politics?

calculatte• 4 years ago

People don't generally get into fights, go on strike, or demand violence against other parties over a marvel movie trailer.

ramesh31• 4 years ago

"No politics" means "no partisan identity activism on the clock" like asking a company to get involved in "Black Lives Matters", taking positions about the war in Ukraine beyond nationwide sanctions, or displaying a rainbow flag during "pride month".

Nah. "No politics" simply means "no politics I disagree with".

wpietri• 4 years ago

Quite a lot of companies think that things like civil rights are good for their businesses, and so support them. They see themselves as furthering the interests of the company.

So here "no politics" appears to mean "only the politics that the CEO personally likes". Which, fine, CEOs can do that. But that doesn't mean that people can't point out the hypocrisy of a "no politics" stand that doesn't actually mean "no politics". Which I think is always the case with "no politics" stands, really. It's a way for powerful ingroups to deny that outgroup issues should even be discussed.

ivraatiems2• 4 years ago

I don't like Coinbase's policy, but this is not at all inconsistent with it. They were clear that they'd only ever engage politically in order to further their company's goals. This is exactly what they said they'd do.

I would not work at a company that behaved like Coinbase in this case, but it's not fair to suggest they are being hypocritical here. Their stance has been consistent - it's just a bad one.

londons_explore• 4 years ago

"politics only for the companies goals" sounds good to me... What's wrong with it?

Eg. A coffee company gets involved in the politics around recyclable cups, labor laws, import taxes on coffee, etc. But they don't get involved with abortion...

msbarnett2• 4 years ago

Eg. A coffee company gets involved in the politics around recyclable cups, labor laws, import taxes on coffee, etc. But they don't get involved with abortion...

The problem becomes that these things aren't cleanly separable and policy support is basically fungible; the anti-coffee-import-tax politician might oppose forcing almond growers in California to reduce water usage, or the pro crypto politician might be for federal anti-abortion measures. You can't earmark the money for some kinds of votes but not others; funding a politician's re-election gets you everything they vote for or nothing at all.

So it becomes not so much "no politics" as "the corporation's politics ahead of any other"; exacerbating drought conditions in California is "political" and not worth discussing even as the politician responsible for it is funded in order to obtain import-tax-free coffee, or banning abortion is considered an acceptable price to pay (and don't you dare bring up this consequence at work, for that would be "political") for pro-crypto policies.

I don't even necessarily object to companies saying "I accept that X happening is the cost of obtaining corporate goal Y", it's just ludicrously dishonest to pretend that involving themselves in politics isn't political and doesn't have political consequences beyond "crypto good".

stonogo• 4 years ago

"No politics" has always meant "the boss's politics."

mtlynch2• 4 years ago

I normally like Molly White's crypto coverage, but this seems like a deliberately obtuse take.

In the blog post she references (but, tellingly, does not link) Armstrong says specifically that Coinbase will engage in politics around crypto:

We focus minimally on causes not directly related to the mission:
Policy decisions: If there is a bill introduced around crypto, we may engage here, but we normally wouldn’t engage in policy decisions around healthcare or education for example.
...
Political causes: We don’t advocate for any particular causes or candidates internally that are unrelated to our mission, because it is a distraction from our mission.

[0] https://blog.coinbase.com/coinbase-is-a-mission-focused-comp...

mc322• 4 years ago

This is A very practical take. It’s odd that I have say it’s a sane take, because 15 years ago this would be the way 95% of companies operated.

jxramos• 4 years ago

makes me wonder if something is a true distraction is there an associated cost for taking on that distraction. I guess an opportunity cost of resources and focus/attention the employees are asked to grapple with.

ac29• 4 years ago

Companies engaging in political activities to further their goals is understandable.

Shoving politician rankings into their user facing app to attempt to get customers directly involved in their political lobbying is a bit too much. People would absolutely criticize other tech companies for doing this.

tarakat• 4 years ago

In the blog post she references (but, tellingly, does not link)

This is standard procedure for most journalists - they prefer to present only their interpretation (or spin) of events, rather than let their audience form their own opinion.

See for example how many stories of someone making offensive statements omit quoting those statements. And if you'll allow me to reach a bit, it seems the cruder and more unpersuasive the statements are, the more likely they are to be quoted, while any more intellectual, compelling reasoning gets omitted.

Edit: Flimm points out that in this instance, there is a link. So the article merely misrepresents it, and does not also omit it, which I maintain is the norm.

Flimm• 4 years ago

I see two links, including one to the Coinbase blog.

haunter• 4 years ago

Never heard about this person but their Wikipedia page is something else, like an ad

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molly_White_(writer)

renewiltord• 4 years ago

It's definitely either self-promotion or promotion through friends in the community seeing as she edits a lot. It totally reads like an ad.

But that works. I know one guy who had his Chief of Staff write his Wikipedia.

bena• 4 years ago

I think promoting politicians violates the "no politics" spirit but promoting/lobbying for specific legislation would not.

Because once you start promoting individuals based on a single issue you agree with, you've become a mark. Your vote, your support is easy to get by simply paying the bare minimum lip service to the cause.

I could run for office on a platform of polluting the environment, defining abortion to include straight up murdering babies up to 9 months old, mandating each student carries a long gun with a minimum 20 round capacity, arson, rape, and pillaging. But as long as I'm also pro-crypto, Coinbase will support me. Which includes, if not implicit support for the rest of my positions, at least tolerance of them. Especially if I'm the only pro-crypto politician on the docket.

And as long as my pro-crypto stance is a minority one, I don't even have to be successful in advancing pro-crypto laws.

The net effect of the stance of supporting politicians on a single issue is that you wind up supporting horrible politicians and horrible people.

What one should do, and is the much harder path, is to petition your current politicians to adopt your views. To convince them that either enough people want it or that it would be good for the people and they will thank you for it by continuing to vote for you.

But still, "politics" is a lot like null, it's a greedy term. You really can't do "some politics" or "politics, but just in this one area". Once you introduce the term, you now have to be aware of it everywhere.

nailer• 4 years ago

Rather than post n comments on HN about how this article is deceptive, let’s just flag it.

“No politics” Coinbase rolls out feature to promote crypto-friendly politicians

Related Stories