The straw man is obvious and you are being disingenuous. The comment you are replying did not at all imply that "[r]educing funding for something sometimes harmful" was a crime on the same level as the Holocaust, or any such thing. It is you making that assertion; your straw man.
It is very obvious, surely, that the comment was a dark, sardonic point about the tendency for "anticipatory obedience" in the Trump era (calling AI "superintelligence" etc).
That is to say, stopping doing something fully legal and uncontroversial out of the fear of reprisals that are ultimately the result of a government (the Trump administration) acting beyond their bounds; there is no reason at all for companies to stop their DEI initiatives when Trump's power is limited to federal institutions, and there is even less reason for them to withdraw sponsorship.
Anticipatory obedience absolutely is part of why major German (and US) firms ended up complicit in the Holocaust.
Companies engaging in anticipatory obedience, taking away programs that are still addressing inequality of opportunity, are on that slippery slope. The last couple of years have made it easier to understand how companies get captured by extremism and illegality.
(Law firms especially; Trump has broken, humiliated, defanged and belittled law firms who took on merit-based cases against him and that is part of why corporations are backing out of DEI initiatives; their law firms cannot be counted on to argue for them)
alt Hacker News
The straw man is obvious and you are being disingenuous. The comment you are replying did not at all imply that "[r]educing funding for something sometimes harmful" was a crime on the same level as the Holocaust, or any such thing. It is you making that assertion; your straw man.
It is very obvious, surely, that the comment was a dark, sardonic point about the tendency for "anticipatory obedience" in the Trump era (calling AI "superintelligence" etc).
That is to say, stopping doing something fully legal and uncontroversial out of the fear of reprisals that are ultimately the result of a government (the Trump administration) acting beyond their bounds; there is no reason at all for companies to stop their DEI initiatives when Trump's power is limited to federal institutions, and there is even less reason for them to withdraw sponsorship.
Anticipatory obedience absolutely is part of why major German (and US) firms ended up complicit in the Holocaust.
Companies engaging in anticipatory obedience, taking away programs that are still addressing inequality of opportunity, are on that slippery slope. The last couple of years have made it easier to understand how companies get captured by extremism and illegality.
(Law firms especially; Trump has broken, humiliated, defanged and belittled law firms who took on merit-based cases against him and that is part of why corporations are backing out of DEI initiatives; their law firms cannot be counted on to argue for them)