Recently, now-former Google employee, James Damore, circulated a controversial memo outlining his disdain for the company’s diversity agenda.
What he writes in his 10-page memo is not only factually correct, it’s fairly benign (especially when juxtaposed with our current state of political vitriol).
Damore, a current Systems Biology PhD candidate at Harvard, pointed out that biological gender characteristics account for some of the differences in career choices of men and women. Additionally, he argued that not all differences in career paths between genders are due to inherent discrimination.
This essential fact usually eludes the left: men and women are different. I outline many ways their careers could potentially diverge in my article debunking the wage gap. Unfortunately, at leftist companies like Google, this ‘wrong think’ was enough to get Damore fired.
So much for valuing diversity.
Funny enough, the ‘wrong think’ is actually just reality. As Debra Soh, a Sexual Neuroscience PhD from York University, puts it in her op-ed: No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science, she writes:
Despite how it’s been portrayed, the memo was fair and factually accurate. Scientific studies have confirmed sex differences in the brain that lead to differences in our interests and behaviour.
Perhaps unlucky for Damore, this wasn’t the only thing Google pounced on when terminating him. The memo continued displaying against-the-grain attitudes (at Google, at least) by challenging the notion of “diversity for diversity’s sake.” As Ben Shapiro wrote:
The memo also tears into race-specific and sex-specific programming and mentoring, diversity hires, and verging on illegal discrimination. The author suggests ending the company-wide attempt to castigate those who disagree as immoral, stop alienating conservatives, and confront the company’s leftist biases, as well as moving away from empathy as a core value, avoiding microaggressions sinkholes, and being open about science.
All of this is not just eminently reasonable, it’s obviously correct.
This excerpt was taken before Damore himself actually revealed the potentially illegal diversity summits and training that Google conducts regularly.
This whole situation teaches us two important lessons. First, the left has no intention of combatting ideas with ideas. Second, diversity of opinion is not as valuable to aesthetic diversity.
To the first point, Google didn’t respond to the ideas expressed in the memo, they just fired Damore. This is argumentative resignation at its finest. Instead of addressing the issues outlined by one of their own employees they chose to mischaracterize his viewpoint and dump him. They terminated an employee with real concerns because of the arguments of a straw man.
To the second point, Google seems to value diversity of race, gender, sexual orientation, and every other innate characteristic more than they value diversity of opinion. This thought process is devoid of morality, and it is also inherently racist, sexist and bigoted. Google has shown they are now everything they pretend to hate.
Because classifying a whole population (whether it be whites, gays, women, etc.) based on their innate characteristics is the definition of bigotry. To pick and chose people based on their skin color for a position regardless of whether they are qualified is racism; plain and simple. It’s why people like Vijay Chokal-Ingam pretend to be black to get into medical school to take advantage of the affirmative action intended to help blacks.
Meritocracy ensures that everyone is on equal footing, not of equal height. It’s the difference between equal outcome and equal opportunity. The latter is what we want; true equality. The former often necessitates inequity.
But Google doesn’t see it that way. They want the cosmetic diversity so they can signal their virtue. It’s the definition of cultural Marxism. This is what it looks like. Everyone can be different as long as we all think the same. It suppresses diversity of opinion, and companies like Google are at the forefront of shutting down dissenters.
Cultural Marxism, as a term, is powerful as well, since it is an apt description of what is going on. You don’t have to believe in the entire Frankfurt School conspiracy to know that influential ideas from those thinkers have changed the political climate to one that favors blind allegiance to unwavering principles (such as, diversity is our strength) over a rational exchange of ideas. By even mentioning cultural Marxism you’re committing ‘wrong think’.
It’s why leftist sites describe using the term cultural Marxism itself as bigoted and some even try to link it to the alt-right in an attempt to slander conservatives and limit damaging attacks on leftist ideology.
These attempts to limit language and link every attack on leftism as bigoted just radicalizes the other side. It also happens to be a fascist tactic (which is ironic, since the left allegedly hates fascism).
Radicalization is rarely good. With more companies like Google firing good employees based on their ideas and dragging them through the mud, it provides ammo to the political sect that wants to use the government as a weapon. This must be resisted at all costs, and Google is making it happen.