One of the big stories in the news this week came from an employee at Google, who published a 10-page memo entitled “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber.”
In this memo, the Google employee has the audacity to assert that *gasp* men and women are different, and it may be those differences, rather than societal biases, that explain why more men get into the tech field.
Google has a “diversity program,” which apparently hammers the idea that any disparity in ethnic or gender representation in the workplace is due to people’s biases, whether conscious or unconscious. They also offer certain classes to people based on their gender – such as a classes that teach coding, which are only open to female employees – which represent an institutional bias on the part of Google.
The memo goes to some lengths to explain how gender disparities in certain industries (technology, specifically, since it applies to Google), can be explained by other factors than personal or institutional biases. It also goes further than that, explaining how Google’s own institutional biases silence employees who disagree with the company’s policies and indoctrination schemes. The employee further points out how, in its efforts to promote diversity, Google has created its own culture of institutional discrimination based not on evidence, but on biases promulgated throughout the organization by the company’s leadership. Employees with differing viewpoints can’t speak their minds, for fear of retribution from coworkers and higher-ups.
The memo’s author, now identified as James Damore, made several very valid points. Like most modern college campuses, it isn’t surprising to hear that an organization like Google has developed a culture of politically-correct ideological oppression.
As though to prove his point, once Mr. Damore’s identity had been verified, Google promptly fired him. In her response to the memo, Danielle Brown, Google’s VP of Diversity, Integrity and Governance made sure to emphasize several times that Google is all about diversity and inclusion, and pointed out that Google has “so many platforms for employees to express themselves.” What she, and Google as an organization, seemingly fail to realize is that the quantity of platforms for expression was never at issue; the silencing of viewpoints that contradict the company’s orthodoxy was. Offering innumerable platforms to express the latest GroupThink does not make Google diverse or inclusive, especially not if deviation from the company’s mandated doctrine results in retaliation.
His “screed,” as Gizmodo chose to characterize it, has been mischaracterized both by Google, and throughout the mainstream media (including in the CNN Tech article about his firing linked above), in an attempt to make his well-reasoned argument seem like the misogynistic ramblings of a hate-filled right-winger. It’s rather telling that their only real response to his well-thought-out, footnoted and sourced argument is to cry “HATE SPEECH!” and terminate his employment.
If you look past the politically correct propaganda, it’s easy to see that Google does not promote diversity or inclusion at all. Underneath that colorful logo and supposedly groundbreaking company culture, Google is just another bastion of liberal fascism.