Google just made the case for treating major social media companies like public utilities much stronger by its recent decision to fire James Damore, a Google engineer who wrote an internal memo blasting the web company’s diversity policies.
Damore’s 10-page memo accused Google of silencing conservative political opinion and criticized the company’s efforts to force “diversity,” pointing to well-known biological differences between men and women that determine the much higher number of men in tech.
Some would see this as an attempt by Damore to promote true diversity within the company, a diversity of opinion. But, actually, this is exactly the reason why he had to be fired. Opinions are only for those who still don’t understand the way the world works. A company’s mission, by contrast, is to get on with the business of making as much money as it possibly can for its fickle investors.
Because of the essential differences between men and women that Damore referred to in his memo, men will always dominate tech, case closed. But because of the unfortunate hegemonic culture of egalitarianism in Western societies, this will make companies like Google appear “sexist” (and of course “racist”). That too is inevitable.
The only way out for such companies is to keep on hiring more people who can do the job (mainly men of certain races) while using scapegoat figures like Damore to noisily signal how “committed to diversity and equality” they are.
In this way, Damore serves an extremely useful function for Google. Without him, they would probably have to up the number of diversity hires by a few hundred to get the same positive PR effect. That would, of course, be extremely expensive in all sorts of nasty ways.
In the future, tech companies like Google would be well advised to have a policy of looking for more Damores, ideal candidates to hire and fire so as to specifically demonstrate their egalitarian bona fides. The ideal candidate should be someone like Damore, a talented White male engineer with conservative or Alt-Lite leanings, who would be liable to rebel against the regular “diversity Kool Aid drinking sessions” in some minor way.
Once the minor act of rebellion had occurred, such candidates could then be hauled over the coals and fired to a media fanfare, gaining the company a mountain of free “We Love Diversity” PR to offset against the relentless fact that the company still isn’t hiring many women or Blacks.
This would essentially ensure that the company could get by with even fewer diversity hires than before and make the workforce even more male and White. So, win-win!
Of course, if the company was really committed to diversity as they claim to be, they would immediately employ 50% females in every department. But they are just sexist pigs who also want the benefit of appearing to be in line with the hegemonic liberal culture. Crafty! I don’t think a low IQ woman manager would have been able to come up with such an effective management strategy.