Discussion about this post

User's avatar
David's avatar

There is a difference between objecting when someone calls for murder, and getting cancelled for mis-gendering. Their employers responded the way they did because of that difference, I think. They cannot support an employee who has publicly called for the murder of a politician, or anyone, when people point it out to them publicly. I read Carter’s article this morning somewhat skeptically because I too really didn’t like the video of the poor Home Depot woman. But I finally concluded he was making a valid point about the difference between lefties and righties. I like what Robbie Starbucks is doing, too - if Tractor Supply or John Deere think their DEI regime is proper they have the right to defend that view. That they don’t or can’t is telling.

Expand full comment
Person Online's avatar

I think this conversation is made difficult because it is not a matter of absolutes. There are quite plainly some things which are stupid or evil enough that you should get fired for saying them. The test I would propose for determining the distinction is the simple thought experiment of, if I were this person's boss, would I fire them? Not for any kind of huge mob coming at me or them, but simply if someone showed me what they had posted.

In this case, the answer is yes. If I saw an employee say that they wished for a major political figure's head to be blown off right after that almost actually happened, I would feel completely justified in terminating that employee. Such behavior not only shows poor judgment but also an evil character. Liberalism, "muh principles," or whatever other copes anyone can imagine do not require that an employer must tolerate any and all behavior or speech, no matter how vile and ill-considered.

Expand full comment
158 more comments...

No posts