Does anyone else feel disenfranchised?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by aristotle, Apr 3, 2014.

  1. aristotle macrumors 68000

    aristotle

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #1
    After seeing what happened to Brendan Eich, the former CEO and co-founder of Mozilla, I feel like I live in a society where I have no freedom of speech or freedom of conscience. I feel like if I were to express my beliefs, someone would try to ruin my life out of spite.

    Do we still live in a free society or do we live under the tyranny of the vocal minority? I fear that we live in the latter. We live in a dystopia.

    Mr. Eich did nothing wrong. He used his own personal money and he never used his position in his organization to further his beliefs. What the mafia of gay rights activists did to him is the worst example of human rights violation that I can think of. Those of you who attacked him stripped him of his most fundamental human rights.

    Here is the problem that happens when you disenfranchise people. They lose hope and trust in a civil society. When that happens revolution is often what follows.

    I feel like my vote is irrelevant if social pressure and money/lawyers can override my most basic human rights and my vote. Why should I continue to abide by the laws of a civil society? Why should I continue to pay taxes? Why should I continue to serve the "law" if I feel like I have no power and no voice?

    Should I quit my job and go work for the mafia? Should I take all of the knowledge I have of the "system" and go work for them instead?

    Be careful about how far you push the "majority" for they might at some point snap and make the pendulum swing back so hard that you will be wishing for the "good old days" of even the 50's.

    I fear that democracy might not survive that swing and the tolerance that so many have enjoyed will be a distant memory.

    If you sow intolerance then you will reap intolerance. Eich was not intolerant. He was not calling to silence anyone.

    Stop trying to silence others before it is too late.
     
  2. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #2
    Such Melodrama!
     
  3. aristotle thread starter macrumors 68000

    aristotle

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #3
    Interesting. So you don't believe in freedom of speech? Are you saying that what happened to Eich has no chilling effect on freedom of speech and political freedom? Is that what you are saying?

    He used his own money. He did not use his position in his company to promote his view point. Someone within his company had an axe to grind against him and chose to violate his rights and freedoms with prejudice and that is all you have to say?

    Do you remember the old "First they came for the ____ and I said nothing."?

    Here is what I have to say about your contribution. Such apathy.
     
  4. jonbravo77 macrumors 6502a

    jonbravo77

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    #4
    Sooooo, basically what you are saying is you have freedom of speech but someone with the opposite view does not. That's what I interpreting from your post.

    Eich was a contradiction to what mozilla stands for and that's equality. Unfortunately he made a decision in 2008 to support prop 8 and now it has come to bite him. No one was rioting, no one causing civil discourse. People who opposed his view took it to public in a civil way, they have that right. His own employees spoke out against it and talked about the culture of mozilla which I have first hand knowledge of who Mozilla hires and what the company stands for.

    He chose just like a lot of others to donate to a cause. He has that right, but I'll be damned if I don't stand up and say he is not fit to run a company that has the culture that Mozilla does and say his views do not fit that culture.

    Honestly, how dare you sit on your high horse and look down upon those that don't agree with you and accuse them of being " the mafia of gay rights activists". You don't like where this country is heading I'm sure there are countries that share your views and suppress "the vocal minority".

    Bye...
     
  5. SoAnyway macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 10, 2011
    #5
    So conservatives should have the freedumb to say derogatory things about groups of people they have issues with but those groups of people should not be allowed to do likewise?

    It sounds like hypocrisy is the first thing that conservatives are taught at con school, that's the con in conservative.
     
  6. Sydde, Apr 3, 2014
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2014

    Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #6
    Freedom of speech does not protect you from consequences. Consider the case of Helen Thomas – freedom of speech and of the press. This venerated whitehouse reporter made some comments that sounded anti-semitic and faced some rather severe repercussions (which ultimately were not that bad for her, as she was close to retiring anyway).

    I mean, sure, you are welcome to piss people off all you want, but the first amendment only protects you from the government, not from pissed-off people. Like with Romney's 47% comment: freedom of speech did not mean the voters were required to ignore that.
     
  7. aristotle thread starter macrumors 68000

    aristotle

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #7
    So all of you guys who think Eich is evil and deserved to be pushed out, are you going to stop using Javascript?

    He invented it.
    See:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaScript

    I am waiting to see how many of you are going to never ever use Javascript again.
    :rolleyes:

    How did Eich limit the free speech of anyone? Prop 8 had nothing to do with freedom of speech. If you opposed it then you should have voted against it and used your speech to support your point of view.

    I say again, many of you are hypocrites with double standards.

    @SoAnyway: Do you want to compare life stories? Shall I tell you about my schoolyard bullies? I don't think your life story would stand up to mine. I had a lot of things to overcome. I would bet that your life has been a cakewalk in comparison. I don't see conservatives getting people fired over issues like this especially over a private contribution with private money from their own wallet.
     
  8. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #8
    I don't the Mr Eich is evil. And frankly I'm not sure I have much control over my Javascript usage.

    I think you are mistaking the political and legal concept of Freedom of Speech with the business reality that in a highly competitive marketplace branding, imaging, and customer perception is important - sometimes critically so.

    Freedom of speech as a legal concept doesn't mean freedom from responsibility. An employee of Goldman Sachs is free to take out a full page ad in the Wall Street Journal calling Lloyd Blankfein a doofus. But he ought not to be surprised if he ends up getting fired shortly thereafter.

    A CEO or Executive of any large organization ought to understand that taking a public position on a controversial issue may end up having consequences for his or her job. But taking responsibility for one's own actions is what leadership is all about. People who don't understand that have no business being executives.
     
  9. aristotle thread starter macrumors 68000

    aristotle

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #9
    He did not take a public position on the issue. At no point did he make any statement in the capacity of CEO of any other position in the organization on the issue. He also took no action in the capacity of CEO or any other position within the company hindering anyone based on sexual orientation.

    What he did do is donate some money from his own pocket as a private citizen.

    If you want to talk about a CEO using their position to further their own political aims then we should discuss Tim Cook. Should he be allowed to use Apple as leverage to further his own personal agenda? Should he at the very least consult the shareholders at at meeting about his intentions?

    I would say that Tim Cooks past actions are more of a violation of the trust of shareholders than anything Eich did with his personal funds.

    Again, how is his personal money any of our business? It seems to me that someone had an axe to grind with Eich over a completely unrelated matter and decided to see what kind of dirt they could dig up on him.

    How can you, in good conscience defend what happened to him? He did not use his position in any way to further his personal views.

    Sorry but I am personally disgusted by this trend towards mixing personal things with professional work life. They should be seen as separate and nobody should have a right to meddle in the personal affairs of anyone regardless of how "public" their job is. This includes celebrities.

    Paparazzi should be subject to anti-stalking laws like anyone else. To be protected as a journalist, you would have to be engaging in actual journalism. If not, then you should be treated as a private citizen and subject to the same laws as anyone else.
     
  10. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #10
    Then why did people know about it? I mean, we have these things called "501(c)4s" that allow people to donate great flipping wadges of cash anonymously, if he wanted to be discreet, he should have used one of those.
     
  11. iBlazed macrumors 68000

    iBlazed

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2014
    Location:
    New Jersey, United States
    #11
    So basically you're opposed to social backlash unless you are the social backlash. They weren't complaining back when they were the majority view, now that being a bigot puts you into the minority all of a sudden they're all sensitive to being "discriminated" against. I've said it before and will say it again, freedom of speech only protects you from persecution by the government, not by society. Welcome to the free market, where bigotry is apparently no longer supported.
     
  12. aristotle thread starter macrumors 68000

    aristotle

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #12
    No, I am opposed to companies firing people for making political donations and for fascists stalking people to dig into records. What sort of mental illness does the person who brought this issue up suffer from? Who cares if it is public record? It takes a special kind of psycho to go after someone for making a donation with their own funds many years ago.

    This was not society. It was a vocal minority group. We call this the tyranny of the minority. How will you feel if the tables are turned on you one day and you are persecuted for the causes that you donated to? What if secretaries and janitors and managers are scrutinized for what they donated to?

    I find this to be extremely creepy and Orwellian. It can be legal and yet wrong at the same time. Stop being so damn legalistic.

    This sort of thing makes me happy to be a Canadian because we have more protections on privacy and not everything we do is open under a public record.

    @iBlazed: So how will you feel if one day, I do nothing when they come for you? Should I be as callous as you are now?
     
  13. iBlazed macrumors 68000

    iBlazed

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2014
    Location:
    New Jersey, United States
    #13
    No, he was just fighting to strip them of civil rights that he gets to enjoy because he "doesn't agree with" their way of life. But no, he wasn't intolerant at all. :rolleyes:

    ----------

    You seem to mistake tolerance with the acceptance of bigotry. It doesn't work that way. If there's a day when they "come for" the people fighting for equality and civil rights, that's when we'll have a problem. The causes I donate to don't actively seek to strip my fellow countrymen of their rights. Also, don't say it isn't society, there was a major public backlash, it's not a vocal minority, it's now a vocal majority. A new majority that doesn't take kindly to bigotry. Kind of a fresh change for America. Being Canadian, I'm surprised you're against it.
     
  14. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #14
    This sounds like a classic case of Free Markets, when a business gets rid of a liability, in this case a bigot. In a reality it doesn't matter about rights and wrongs on the situation, but once Mr Eich became the story and by association a liability, his own board members got rid of him.
     
  15. aristotle thread starter macrumors 68000

    aristotle

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #15
    Eich invented Javascript. I suggest that you stop using javascript if you think he is a bigot.

    I decided to uninstall firefox and I sent feedback to the organization concerning this matter.

    He might be a bigot to you but I consider the person who instigated this is the bigot.

    ----------

    What rights? Marriage requires a license. Does freedom of speech require a license? Are there blogging licenses?

    Marriage was always defined by gender, not sex or sexual identity.

    You have a perverted definition of bigotry. Sorry but you do. I think you are going to be in for a rude awakening when you see that you are not actually part of the majority but rather a minority and a majority that has remained silent will wake up and start expressing themselves. You are going to be on the wrong of history.

    I am surprised that you are so against freedom of speech when Americans have been so critical of limits placed on freedom of speech in the past in Canada.

    Do you also oppose democratic voting? Do you oppose referendums? Do you oppose public consultation? Do you oppose the first amendment rights?

    I am sorry but polls do not represent the majority of people. The majority of people are too busy at work to respond to polls. Look at your voter turnout rates in your country.

    You should actually fear a high voter turnout in rural areas because it would not go well for your party.
     
  16. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #16

    What does that have anything to do with this discussion. I have a Ford engine in my car, and Henry Ford was a anti-Semite, but it's not the engine's fault.

    You can think what you like, but why don't you try to do something about.
    I suggest that you try to topple the Board of Directors, of course that would mean that you would have to come out in the open to do it. But I can guarantee you, your life would get very interesting very fast.
     
  17. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #17
    On the contrary. Everyone should use javascript to write pro-gay code.
     
  18. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #18
    Beat me to it :(

    You are free to express your opinion, but if you are a CEO of a tech company being a bigot is not going to go down well in the tech scene. If he had donated to the KKK I doubt you would be defending him.

    If you are still adamant about repressing gays you are going to have a bad time over the next few years. The dinosaurs are on their way out.
     
  19. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #19
    Eich used his freedom of speech (the SCOTUS has already said that money=speech) to support denying a minority of equal rights. The Mozilla community and its supporters used their freedom of speech to voice their displeasure at his hiring because of his past speech. Eich then resigned on his own free will.

    No one was designed their freedoms. But Eich learned a valuable lesson: Freedom can come with consequences.
     
  20. iBlazed, Apr 4, 2014
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2014

    iBlazed macrumors 68000

    iBlazed

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2014
    Location:
    New Jersey, United States
    #20
    Not sure how things work in Canada, but here in the US we have a Supreme Court that interprets our Constitution. Our Supreme Court has on multiple occasions declared marriage a RIGHT. Licensees have nothing to do with your argument, completely irrelevant. Our Supreme Court decided that marriage is a right, end of story. Apparently your country feels that it's a right as well.

    Oh, and to answer your other questions, yes, freedom of speech often requires a license. Try having a protest march without obtaining a permit first...

    By who?

    Right...keep fantasizing about that. Whatever helps you sleep at night. I prefer to live in reality. :rolleyes:
    I'm gonna be on the wrong side of history?? LMAO!!! Never heard the opposition attempt that argument before...good one!
    BTW, might want to go check some public opinion polls, you seem confused as to where our society stands on this issue as of today. You claim the the "majority has been silent"...in what universe? The opponents of gay marriage are the loudest, whiniest, most entitled excuses for humans there could be. They've only been silent as of lately because they know they lost their little cultural battle they started.

    No, no, no and no. But I'm not sure how that relates to this argument at all.

    Again, whatever helps you sleep at night...

    Oh look, Ted Cruz Jr.......well guess what? I don't fear it. If anything, the Republicans are fearing the voter demographic shift that's currently happening and they fear more people voting in more densely populated areas because they know they will have no chance of ever winning again once that happens. Regardless, it really doesn't matter which party is in power in the US. Civil rights are in the hands of the courts, not the party in power. I'm surprised a Canadian like yourself is so into US politics...

    Look, if you want to be a bigot it's your right, just stop trying to shove your agenda down society's throats. I'm sure your opinion wouldn't have a very warm reception from people in Canada either.
     
  21. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #21
    I'm curious.

    If all he did was make a donation as a private citizen, how did anyone find out about it?
     
  22. Septembersrain Contributor

    Septembersrain

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2013
    Location:
    Texas
    #22
    I really feel like my world will eventually have to change. Everything in it is unsustainable.
     
  23. ugahairydawgs macrumors 68020

    ugahairydawgs

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    #23
    The sad truth is that we live in a world where there is very little tolerance for an opposing view point. Instead of having a discussion on an issue we default to outrage and hatred and end up with shouting matches and hostility as a result. Walk into a room full of Republicans and start talking tax increases and you're going to get a bunch of red faced people calling you a socialist. Walk into a room full of Democrats and start talking tax cuts and you're going to get a bunch of red faced people calling you a sellout for the rich and hater of poor people.

    The answer to an issue is almost never a choice between black or white. There's generally a lot of grey, but we hardly ever get past the opening firebombs to get to a point where we can actually have a meaningful discussion.
     
  24. Aspasia macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Location:
    Halfway between the Equator and North Pole
    #24
    Very well stated and so sadly true.
     
  25. barkomatic macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Location:
    Manhattan
    #25
    As has been stated repeatedly, Eich's free speech was not violated in any way. He was not arrested for his views or public donations nor was he charged with a crime.

    Everyone else in the United States also have free speech rights -- and several citizens decided they didn't like his views and were outspoken. As a result, Eich and Mozilla make a free market decision to terminate their relationship.

    U.S. citizens who supported Eich were also free to speak up and many of them did--but apparently not enough to change the outcome of this situation.

    Your claim that somehow we've lost the right of free speech is completely baseless. I feel like you think that if you repeat a lie frequently enough that people will start to believe it.
     

Share This Page