An important lesson from Google’s memo controversy.

There are many articles already out there as a reaction to the manifesto written by Google’s (now former) software engineer — James Damore. But while the topic is very polarizing it split the community into two groups, both fighting largely with emotions and exaggeration rather than logic.
I’m not going to lie that I do have my own opinion, but I don’t want that article to be about whether I agree with that person or not. Let’s concentrate on the reaction because that’s just one example of a sensitive topic that brings the worst in us. We should learn how to react to such topics because it’s the reaction that bothers me the most. The reaction of people, the reaction of Google and its management. They handled it the worst way possible for both sides — they fired a person for speaking up (doesn’t matter if he is right or not) therefore proving his point. Nobody wins here, both sides lost and we learned and gained nothing.
Let me start with how I try to handle such situations. When I find an opinion difficult, different to what I believe in I make a thought experiment. It’s called “The opposite world”. You reverse the sides — the opinion that you just read is the reality, the current status quo, and the person said or wrote what you believe in (or what you believe is the reality). Then you ask yourself: would I react differently in such reality? Would I change my mind?
Let’s use the “the opposite world” approach to that manifesto situation. And let’s exaggerate it a bit, to show it better. Imagine a world where white males are openly promoted in work environment. Where companies state things like: “we believe in unity, we believe that we can work best only if we are all the same, therefore we are searching for white male candidates to work with us in making the world a better place”. Where companies would give white males extra points when hiring, where they would offer special programs for white males only to grow, to learn new things, to get promoted more.
And in that world, there would be a person who would write an internal memo to all people in the company. It would say that the company has “right leaning biases” it should consider. It would say that people are different and that difference brings an actual advantage for the company and environment. That the company should not promote white males but think beyond that, choose the best _person_ for the job, for the improvement programs, for new positions, instead of concentrating on race and gender, by promoting a certain group.
Now if you lived in this world, would you want that person to be silenced? Would you like that person to be fired and never hired again? Would you literally stand up, get to that person’s desk and beat the shit out of him or her? If not then why people are doing and suggesting all those things now?
Without choosing sides, without stating who’s right and who’s wrong when it comes to opinions expressed in the memo — that’s just very wrong behavior. It doesn’t move us forward. It makes us fanatics of an opinion or ideology. Some time ago and some time in the future people in power may change and what you believe now might not be popular. And maybe you will find the courage to say something about it. To make the place where you spend a lot of your time better, at least in your mind, in your opinion. Would you like to be fired, attacked, threatened into submission? Or would you like to have a conversation where you could or even would have to prove that you’re right? To have that space for you and others, to challenge what’s the current status quo and hopefully build something better.
I might be wrong but what diversity is all about. For me, it means different people, with different experiences, different ideas, and opinions. Promoting diversity is getting all those ideas and perspectives and letting them mix and alter, leading to better solution and better world for those involved and everyone else. They don’t always have to be right, but all are important because when you pick and choose opinions, you just pick and choose people you alienate. The fact they are wrong doesn’t make you right. And if you are then you should be able to prove it. Removing a person from a company or society is the worst you could do. They won’t understand your point of view, they won’t learn anything new, won’t gain a new perspective, see the problem from your point of view, learn the facts that you base your opinion on. That’s not only counterproductive, that’s dangerous no matter if you’re doing it for all the good reasons — that’s where ideology is valued over reason.
Discriminating white males is as bad as discriminating anyone else, because the act is wrong, not the target.
Let me repeat that again — diversity is about inclusion, about teaching and learning different perspectives. It’s not about hearing the same opinion from people with different skin color and set of genitals.
We often think that we only move forward. We think that in the past we had a problem with xenophobia where millions of people were killed only because of their religion or ethnicity. We had a problem with racism where some people were not equal and could be owned because of the color of their skin. A problem with sexism, because women couldn’t vote, couldn’t work, couldn’t learn and decide for themselves. We think that now it’s objectively better, now we’re right. But you know what? If you go back to those times, people thought the same — that they were right.
What moved us forward is the ability to speak, to have a conversation. It wasn’t always peaceful it wasn’t always easy and those people speaking weren’t always right. But because they could talk and weren’t threatened and beaten into submission, we could have a conversation, find a common solution and move forward to where we are now.
How arrogant you have to be to think that you’re the only one right, that you know everything better, that everyone else, every other opinion should be silenced? How afraid you have to be to threaten to beat your opponent, to want to inflict pain and suffering because he disagrees with you? And even if you positively believe that you’re right, do you think that removing people with a different opinion from your society is the best way to prove your point?
Have we really moved forward? Are we really better as people or did we stayed the same, just changed some opinions?
