Google Memo

[DBTrek]

Democrats keep losing elections in spite of Republican paralysis and failure to deliver on almost every front.
That's the only metric I can think of that may reflect trending opinions of Americans - the repeated rejection of identity politics at the ballot box.

[Martin Hash]

If The Counterattack is not working then why did YouTube start moving anti-SJW videos into purgatory? Why did the anti-Free Speech movement even start? Why is Jordan Peterson constantly under fire? Because WE started fighting back, and anyone who hears us is Red-Pilled. Why did the term "Red-Pill" even show up? The SJWs know they're in a battle now, only inches away from winning. In fact, Trump may have been our savior?

[Speaker to Animals]

Just look at these people:

http://archive.is/KnIq2

Do you want to join forces with these betas writing these hilarious articles or do you want to be a man?

I am guessing most guys are abandoning ship en masse right about now. They might not publicly admit to it so as not to risk their social standing and jobs, but come election day.. LOL.

The proof in the pudding will be the next two election cycles. Maybe I am wrong and you will see a big showing for the dems. I doubt it, though. I think they are totally imploding and the only thing that maintains the appearance that they have anything held together at all is the fake media and their bullying efforts to silence dissent.

You saw those two factors bite them in the ass when Trump won the election. They had no idea it was coming because they all believed the lying MSM, and they were so good at bullying people into silence. But you can't bully them into voting for your candidate. Once the curtain closed in the voter booth, we went to Trump Town. SJWs are to thank for that. God bless them.

[Martin Hash]

The whole SJW movement started among people who can't compete in any rational way, so they act irrationally, and deny rational people to speak up about it.

[Fife]

From Instapunit.com: https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/272420/ (internal links at the link)

August 9, 2017

WALTER OLSON: Google memo drama really is about free speech.

Because Google and Silicon Valley are cutting-edge workplaces, there’s a tendency to assume that the premise of the Google memo furor — “Your erroneous opinions are making my work environment hostile” — is somehow new as well.

But it isn’t the least bit new. The application of hostile work environment law to workplace speech — including basically political or ideological discussions, not just vulgar jokes or unwanted personal talk — goes back decades.

I had a chapter on it 21 years ago in my book on employment law, “The Excuse Factory.” Others wrote about it then and earlier.

Jonathan Rauch, for example, in the New Republic in 1997, wrote that “quietly, gradually, the workplace has become an exception” to the general rule that in America the law does not seek to restrain wrongful opinion and expression.

And Rauch explained the indirect mechanism by which this has come to pass: “What the government cannot do directly, it now requires employers to do in its stead: police ‘discriminatory’ speech.”

There’s a word for big government and its big business cronies working hand-in-hand to suppress the individual. I’ll give you a hint: It’s something the Left always accuses the Right of being, but they’re projecting.

[DBTrek]

From Instapunit.com: https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/272420/ (internal links at the link)

August 9, 2017

WALTER OLSON: Google memo drama really is about free speech.

Because Google and Silicon Valley are cutting-edge workplaces, there’s a tendency to assume that the premise of the Google memo furor — “Your erroneous opinions are making my work environment hostile” — is somehow new as well.

But it isn’t the least bit new. The application of hostile work environment law to workplace speech — including basically political or ideological discussions, not just vulgar jokes or unwanted personal talk — goes back decades.

I had a chapter on it 21 years ago in my book on employment law, “The Excuse Factory.” Others wrote about it then and earlier.

Jonathan Rauch, for example, in the New Republic in 1997, wrote that “quietly, gradually, the workplace has become an exception” to the general rule that in America the law does not seek to restrain wrongful opinion and expression.

And Rauch explained the indirect mechanism by which this has come to pass: “What the government cannot do directly, it now requires employers to do in its stead: police ‘discriminatory’ speech.”

There’s a word for big government and its big business cronies working hand-in-hand to suppress the individual. I’ll give you a hint: It’s something the Left always accuses the Right of being, but they’re projecting.

Yep. That's the way.
Notice the absolute dearth of SJW buzzwords/hijacked definitions.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Clearly the solution is for the government to step in and force private companies to develop stricter labor protections for their employees. In order to ensure maximum freedom.

[Martin Hash]

We need new blood to Red Pill. DB put up a good fight but he was nine-tenths pink already.

[DBTrek]

We need new blood to Red Pill. DB put up a good fight but he was nine-tenths pink already.

Strangest surrender speech I've been offered today, but I'll take it.
Glad I could help steer you away from mud wrestling with pigs.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Everyone take heart. If Peterson, et al, are right, then Google will be unable to continue to capture and dominate markets if they fail to purge themselves of low-t, free speech-hating, beta-losers.

Or maybe it is a bunch of bupkis generated by second-rate intellects in order to drum up the moderate internet fame commensurate with being an internet reactionary.