
Tech entrepreneurs’ politics: Liberal, with one big exception - gnicholas
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/06/technology/silicon-valley-politics.html
======
walshemj
Far left no 80% of sv employees would be described as centre right (probably
more socially liberal) in uk terms a wet one nation tory which is what pres
Obama is.

If sv is so far left why do no sv companies have Union recognition?

Far left is those that support Assad and think that stalin was right aka
"Tankies".

~~~
pc86
I think it's important to appropriate contextualize things like "left" and
"right." Most importantly, why are we comparing Silicon Valley to Europe?
They're completely different political climates, _in different countries_.
Comparing political ideologies between two countries is a fool's errand more
often than not.

Within the context of American politics, San Francisco (and SV to a lesser
extent) is one of the most liberal places in the country, probably top 5 and
certainly top 10. Even within the context of the California politics
specifically (itself the 3rd or 4th most liberal state), it's center left.

Trying to frame San Francisco as anything right of center is ridiculous unless
you're comparing it only to things like Communism and Socialism.

Edit: And let's not forget than most people want to frame themselves as either
center left or center right. Very rarely will someone proudly say they are far
left or far right, regardless of context.

~~~
walshemj
its to the right of some conservative's in the uk

~~~
pc86
Did you read the comment?

~~~
walshemj
yes and less American Exceptionisam might help in this discussion

~~~
pc86
It has nothing to do with American exceptionalism, it's about appropriate
context. I don't see anything useful coming out of trying to force San
Francisco residents and London residents onto the same political spectrum.
They're two entirely different spectrums, and "left" and "right" mean
different things.

------
jessriedel
> Over all, the study showed that tech entrepreneurs are very liberal — among
> some of the most left-leaning Democrats you can find. They are
> overwhelmingly in favor of economic policies that redistribute wealth,
> including higher taxes on rich people and lots of social services for the
> poor, including universal health care. Their outlook is cosmopolitan and
> globalist — they support free trade and more open immigration, and they
> score low on measures of "racial resentment."

> On most culture-war issues, they are unrepentantly liberal. They oppose
> restrictions on abortion, favor gay rights, support gun control and oppose
> the death penalty.

> ...The study found one area where tech entrepreneurs strongly deviate from
> Democratic orthodoxy and are closer to most Republicans: They are deeply
> suspicious of the government’s efforts to regulate business, especially when
> it comes to labor. They said that it was too difficult for companies to fire
> people, and that the government should make it easier to do so. They also
> hope to see the influence of both private and public-sector unions decline.

~~~
bmmayer1
...so in other words, libertarian

~~~
pc86
> _some of the most left-leaning Democrats you can find_

> _economic policies that redistribute wealth_

> _universal health care_

> _support gun control_

Is that what a libertarian is to you?

------
maxxxxx
People should drop the "far". This is just propaganda talk to mark something
you don't like as extreme.

~~~
thrill
The chart in the fine article shows the "technology founders" are about half
as libertarian as the general Democrat and nearly twice as likely to support
redistribution - but hey, let's not call that or them far left.

~~~
maxxxxx
Watch what people do, not what they say. Technology founders are either
capitalists already or aspiring capitalists. In theory they support
redistribution as long as it doesn't come out of their pockets or equity. You
can't call them far left on the economical scale. That makes that label
meaningless which it is anyways. Americans should stop agonizing about what's
left or right, Democrat or Republican and start thinking about issues. There
are tons of problems this country has that can't be explained or solved by
labeling them left or right. When I came to this country I thought it's a
pragmatic country that gets things done but now I wonder it's just a bunch
delusional ideologues based on the public conversation.

------
flashdance
Far-left is a bit of a stretch for me, this sounds slightly to the right of
Canada's big-tent Liberal party, which is centre-left on a radical day.

For reference, a far-left party is the ML party of Canada.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Canada_(M...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Canada_\(Marxist–Leninist\))

That doesn't remind me of Elon Musk for some reason...

~~~
flashdance
It appears the title has been un-editorialized! I take this back.

------
beager
At first blush, sounds like these folks are generally liberal as a result of
their upbringing and higher education, and then they run into a spot in
entrepreneurship where liberal ideology restricts business growth
(ideologically to the benefit of the consumer). Reconciling high ideals with
how they might restrict your business is always a struggle. Some may use those
ideals to their advantage, some may embrace the cognitive dissonance, some may
turn on their ideals altogether.

------
beepboopbeep
Just want to say-- I will never come back to this site if it devolves into the
political bull shit of reddit. If you folks want to reddit-ize HN, go for it,
but be ready to reap what you sow.

~~~
fortythirteen
To be fair, I think SV has been far too politicized and that's why you see it
here.

------
gnicholas
TLDR:

> _The tech elite’s mix of views is unique; no other group in the survey
> favored both greater wealth redistribution and laxer regulation._

~~~
notyourday
Of course. They were just not asked in details which way they would like the
wealth to be distributed.

~~~
gnicholas
They probably also didn't ask about details on regulation. Techies heard
"regulation" and thought Uber/Airbnb, not runoff wastewater, asbestos, and
formaldehyde (which is what many other people would think of when hearing
"regulation"). I'd guess techies are similar to other liberals in wanting
these other things regulated. They just don't want _tech_ to be regulated.

~~~
pc86
The article itself tells you what definitions they used. In the context of
regulation and redistribution, they mean this:

> _the government should [not] tightly regulate business, and should [not] tax
> the wealthy to fund social programs_

My default would be "should not" and "should," respectively, which is where
most tech founders fell, and puts me in the minority in the other four
categories.

We can argue about tax rates and deductions until we're both blue in the face
but most people agree that the more you make, the more you should pay in
taxes, as a general rule. And "tightly" has a distinctively negative
connotation to me. I think something should be legal and unregulated until
there is some evidence that it needs to be either regulated or outright
illegal. Business, generally, should not be _tightly_ regulated, except in
rare instances (healthcare, yes; banking, probably; insurance, probably).

------
CPLX
If they side with moneyed corporate interests and management against labor
then they aren't left wing.

The lack of an actual labor party in this country is a disaster, and is
underpinning the wildly unpredictable and regressive nature of our current
politics.

~~~
peoplewindow
According to the article they only surveyed people who _are_ management and
corporate interests - founders and billionaires!

------
nextstep
Mostly virtue signaling. The piece finally address labor at the very last
graphic: most entrepreneurs think labor unions should have less influence. The
NYT painting this as “far-left” is a sign of how far to the right the US has
come.

------
rjsw
Is that "Far Left" by US standards or by those of the rest of the world ?

~~~
werber
American : pro choice, universal health care, gay rights, and gun control, but
anti labor

~~~
maxxxxx
By today's standards they would probably mark Reagan as leftie. And most of
Europe has dropped off the spectrum completely.

------
d--b
Now this is an interesting study. In some ways it reflects the shift that
happened in France lately, where the new president is doing pretty much that:
increasing taxes on capital and decreasing regulations for businesses while
being very liberal regarding social matters.

I also suspect that in silicon valley there is a difference between the 30+
age group and the 30-. It's a shame they didn't make that data available but
it sounds to me that younger people are more libertarian than people in their
30s.

------
pixelperfect
Biggest surprise of the article for me: only 36% of Democrats and 41% of
Republicans believe "florists raising prices on holidays is fair."

~~~
nolepointer
Yeah, seriously, this is Econ 101.

------
uoaei
If HN's signalling is anything to go off with respect to political leanings,
SV is mostly libertarian with a dash of social democracy to rein in the big
players. This is hardly what anyone outside of an entrenched centrist news
media institution would consider "far left."

------
lj3
This isn't a study, it's a survey. Of course they're all going to say they're
as far left as they can possibly be. Saying anything else will make them a
target of the unhinged left wing nutbag brigade.

------
jancsika
Someone who hasn't read the article: please define far left.

I think you'll find _after_ reading the article that the term has been
misinterpreted in order to follow a story arc.

~~~
gnicholas
Totally agree. I actually left "far" out of the original title when I posted
on HN, because I didn't remember it being there - and because after having
read the article I didn't get that impression. Granted, I live in CA, so
perhaps my definition of "far left" is different than others, but I can see
that others here seem to share my sense that this was exaggeration on the part
of the NYT.

------
pdog
According to this study, you agree with "libertarian philosophy" if you agree
with the following statement

 _> I would like to live in a society where government does nothing except
provide national defense and police protection, so that people could be left
alone to earn whatever they could._

What a joke. Of course, it turns out that technology entrepreneurs are not
really libertarians when you ask it like that. What if they asked individuals
whether they agree or disagree with the following statement:

 _> I believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition
for a free and prosperous world._

Would they get a different response?

~~~
looki
What strikes me as incredible is that 44% of Democrats agreed with the
original statement. I'm not an American, but isn't that totally incompatible
with the party's ideals?

EDIT: The fact that the vast majority of them agreed with the two options that
are for redistribution of wealth kind of confirm that, in my opinion.

~~~
chamby
I would say that our two party system is why this seems so strange to
foreigners. Americans with nuanced opinions must shoehorn themselves into
Republican or Democrat to participate in our democracy. This often means
compromising on your ideals to have your voice heard on whatever issue is most
important to you at the time.

------
baursak
Why did you change the original NYT title, which is "Silicon Valley’s
Politics: Liberal, With One Big Exception"?

What on Earth is "Far Left"? Surely Silicon Valley's politics are nowhere near
Marxist or anarchist.

EDIT: apologies, you obviously didn't change it.

~~~
CPLX
It was the NYT that changed it, not the poster on HN.

The NYT changes headlines constantly, it's actually sort of fascinating to
watch in real time, which you can do by following this automated Twitter
account:
[https://twitter.com/nyt_diff/status/905407322658402304](https://twitter.com/nyt_diff/status/905407322658402304)

~~~
quuquuquu
Damn dude, awesome work finding this.

Completely changes the dynamic of the accusation above.

It seems NYT follows the "post now, edit later" approach

~~~
jknz
It could be worse than "post now, edit later".

The author could propose a list of a few possible headlines, say 10, each more
or less urging/click-baity/informative. Then let an algorithm choose the most
click-baity headline as visitors click on the headlines in ads or in Google
news (using AB tests or multi-arn bandit algorithms).

I don't know if any news site does this yet, but it could explain the increase
of click-baity or uninformative headlines in Google news.

~~~
gnicholas
WaPo AB uses a tool called Bandito to do just this:
[http://www.niemanlab.org/2016/02/how-the-washington-post-
bui...](http://www.niemanlab.org/2016/02/how-the-washington-post-built-its-
tool-to-re-engage-the-attention-of-distracted-readers-on-mobile/)

------
trentnix
It's mostly virtue signaling as far as the eye can see.

