
Arrington's not a racist...he's just being dishonest - aaronbrethorst
http://whydoeseverythingsuck.com/2011/11/arringtons-not-racist-whos-said-that.html
======
DarkShikari
_But it's clear he is (or at least his writing reflects him to be) incredibly
insensitive to issues of race and privilege._

This seems to be a common theme (though not universal, certainly) of Hacker
News and Silicon Valley as a whole: complete utter obliviousness to the world
outside their bubble, and the idea that they might have advantages that other
people don't. It's practically painful reading the constant Hacker News posts
claiming that privilege doesn't exist, and Arrington just seems to be another
source of this in the tech-world echo chamber.

Most entrepreneurs are consistently logical on technical topics, but whenever
the idea comes up that maybe, _just maybe_ , they have a lot of advantages in
life that other people don't have -- that not everyone can just quit their
job, learn how to program in a few weeks, and make millions on a startup --
quite a few seem to clam up. Is it that hard to comprehend that maybe Silicon
Valley isn't a perfect meritocracy, and that issues of socioeconomic
background, nationality, sex, race, and so forth still exist, to some extent
or another, and that it's important to at least be aware of them?

Apparently it is, because any post even suggesting this seems to be downvoted
to oblivion in any thread on the topic, because if we stop talking about
issues, the issues will just go away.

But as the author says, being ignorant of privilege and people who don't have
the same advantages that you have doesn't inherently make you racist. It just
makes you ignorant, which is hardly uncommon and not difficult to fix, and
certainly not worth such drama.

~~~
cantastoria
I think the main reason accusations of "privilege" are easily ignored is that
it's impossible to quantify exactly how much privilege any one person
possesses.

For instance, I (white, male, college-educated, Sagittarius) am offered a job
at a hot SV startup. According to the theory of privilege, I should credit my
race and background in having at least some part in that accomplishment. But
how am I to know how much of the job offer was because of my "privilege" and
how much was because I was actually the best candidate? Where does my
privilege end and my actual talent and skill begin?

Now suppose I accept this theory. What is the expected behavior? I should turn
down the offer in hopes that they will hire someone else from a less-
privileged background? That strikes me as somewhat unrealistic.

~~~
easp
That's all very nice, but it seems to me to be besides the point.

On point would be to answer the question (to yourself) of what you are going
to do when you are part of the hiring process for open positions at that
startup, or when you are approached about mentoring, or making an angel
investment, or making an introduction.

Given that you seem intent on dismissing the issue as somehow unknowable as
well as concluding that the only course of action is unrealistic, my best
guess is that you will happily behave consistently with your cognitive biases,
rather than working around them.

That doesn't make you a racist. It just makes you ignorant, and one of a proud
majority, it would appear.

------
ghc
With all due respect to Hank Williams, the police misbehavior in the Mountain
View area does not just affect black people. I'm white and I was stopped,
without provocation, in a strip mall in Mountain View on suspicion of being a
shoplifter.

------
mattmanser
Ach, this is turning into a nasty he said, she said with everyone coming off
looking worse than they did.

~~~
jisaacstone
Yes and worse I don't believe I've learned a thing from reading all these
except maybe don't give television interviews?

I guess I'll stop reading & learn more about generator functions instead.

yaaaay productivity

~~~
gte910h
My experiences with the press are the following: the producer has a story they
want to tell. They will tell this story cutting the film of what you happened
to say to support that story. If it's counter or the truth, misleading, bad
for your reputation, etc, they'll still do it anyhow.

I don't know exactly what MA said, but I doubt it made him look anywhere as
bad as the editing did.

------
temphn

      No one imagines him sitting around spewing racial 
      epithets or purposefully discriminating, or even 
      thinking bad racial thoughts, but that is not a very 
      high bar.
    

Orwell had it wrong. His vision of the future was, in some respects, too
optimistic. For even if Arrington is innocent of thoughtcrime ("thinking bad
racial thoughts"), he must still somehow be guilty of something.

Thing is, these fine gradations between "racist" and "racially insensitive"
may mean something to the original poster, but for the vast majority of people
there is little functional difference between the two.

Zooming out from Arrington, this is what usually happens after someone
prominent is accused of heretical beliefs. A lot of people come out of the
woodwork to kick a man when he's down. Now Arrington may deserve it more than
most (surely there's a lot of schadenfreude in the Valley now) but this sort
of witch hunt could easily have been mounted against any prominent figure in
tech.

There is really no defense. You can't say your friends are black. You can't
point to the pipeline. You can't point out Asians. And you damn well can't
mention the statistical implications of the B__l C___e, even as a hypothesis,
as it will drive the neo-Puritans into a hissing rage and convince them that
you "just don't get it".

All they want you to do is confess to your sins in a struggle session. Even if
you've never been "thinking bad racial thoughts", that is not enough for them.
Nothing ever is.

