alslsls

I am only disagreeing with people in the thread turning it into an excuse to never talk about politics on the workplace.

If I was running a company, I would prefer employees not to talk about politics because it will create needless arguments that have nothing to do with the job at hand. If I am an employee, if there is a disagreement about something, how do I know there is not going to be a long-standing hatred from a colleague about my position on a topic that will manifest itself in unpredictable ways.

There are too many activists which make every topic good vs evil and life vs death.

Character: "Can you believe blah blah blah blah"

Response: "Crazy"

Only way to survive in a tech company.

BLM influences who your colleagues are

Does someone need to 100% support BLM (the political movement) to make an acceptable colleague?

What if someone: opposes racism and thinks police's use of force should be more regulated, but disagrees with some BLM tactics/approach to achieving change?

For example, what if the destruction of property from the protests, or calls to defund the police, actually cause a backlash at the next election and it reduces the chances of anything actually being done. Is someone allowed to make a critique like that?

The bottom line is there actually needs to be a diversity of thought to solve problems, and if you silence anyone who isn't 100% behind your message your not going to make change.

Open source shouldn't be political

The more times you can bring people of different opinions and beliefs together, the more good can be done in the world.

The activists of today just divide people, and cause more net pain in the world than the moderates.

Deep down I think these kinds of divisive activists are actually just fighting their own personal deamons and need a way to vent their anger, because their real personal problems in life are unchangeable.

companies can be more democratic going forward if people want it so.

Actually, they are democratic, but its the owners who have the vote, not the employees.

Would a better at war Nazi Germany be "a good thing"?

Yes, from the German perspective, because they wanted world domination.

I don't understand the way people can neglect history, and pretend that the world will live peacefully ever after from now on.

The world is relatively peaceful because the US is more powerful than all other nations combined.

I'm sure if you asked the people who signed it, they would think this is a bad thing too.

Pacifism is evil.

There are plenty of future employees ready to fill the empty spots.

1. Companies are not democratic. 2. Being good at war is a good thing.