Slashdot Mirror


From Apple To Xbox, Tech Companies Lean Left

Velcroman1 writes "Only a week to election time! How does tech feel about politics? If you guessed liberal, you're right: Big Tech leans left. 'They're dominated by coastal people who tend to be more liberal,' says Jim Taylor, a management consultant who writes about the business of psychology. 'Also, those in Big Tech tend to be educated in the better schools, which lean left. Big Tech skews younger and hipper [and favors] social and environmental issues. Their political values trump financial concerns at the organizational culture level and the missions of many firms, especially those that are new media.' For example, Marissa Mayer, known as 'the face of Google,' gave $30,400 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2009. In fact, of the top 10 contributions made by Google in 2009, only one — by CEO Eric Schmidt — was to the Republican National Committee. Facebook has donated almost exclusively to Democratic candidates, according to Transparency Data, including $1,000 to California Sen. Barbara Boxer a year ago, and more recently, almost $5,000 to Richard Blumenthal, who is running for senator in Connecticut."

18 of 685 comments (clear)

  1. Retest by emkyooess · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The vast majority in tech I know lean more towards the libertarian side of things. These kind of tests, due to their flaws of being linear, usually fail to capture that. ("Left" comes up more commonly than "right" for many libertarians because of how self-extreming "right" has become lately.)

    1. Re:Retest by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly, really, we need to stop it with this "liberal" and "conservative" crap because neither qualifier tells how most people feel. There are two dimensions economic and personal freedoms. Either you want more state control of economic matters or you want more freedom in economic matters. Either you want more state control of personal matters or you want less.

      This idea of left and right is so screwed up that no wonder most young people don't even vote.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Retest by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There are two dimensions economic and personal freedoms. Either you want more state control of economic matters or you want more freedom in economic matters. Either you want more state control of personal matters or you want less.

      While the "two dimensional" Nolan chart makes a nice recruiting tool for the Libertarian Party, it's not much more realistic than the two party approach. It completely ignores libertarian socialism for example -- and since the Libertarians pretty much outright stole their name from this movement, perhaps that's no accident.

      Deregulating big business and handing power to corporate plutocracy is not "more freedom in economic matters", it actually lets powerful interests decrease your freedom.

      There are at least five big questions in politics:

      • Should the state dictate, or at least encourage or favor certain personal choices -- family, religion, sex, drug use, etc. -- or should it take a "do your own thing, man" approach?
      • How should we deal with criminals -- harsh punishments, or rehabilitation?
      • Should the benefits of our economic resources -- the "means of production" -- accrue to a minority (capitalism), or be democratic (socialism)?
      • Should decisions about production and consumption be centralized (controlled market) or de-centralized (free market)?
      • Should our nation attempt to dominate others, or mind its own business?

      That's not even counting the one big issue in American politics today: are you part of the reality-based community, or not? More and more, dialog on the conservative side is dominated by out-and-out nutcases: birthers, creationists, climate science deniers, homophobes, et cetera. Sure, on the left you have the occasional truther or Maoist, but they're not generally being promoted as serious candidates for office. The GOP's been leaving rationality behind since the Reagan era.

      That being the case, it's no wonder that the tech sector -- generally more educated folks -- leans left. If and when rational conservatives come back into dominance in the GOP, you might see more techies tilt less to the left.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    3. Re:Retest by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There are far more than two degrees. I tend to want fiscal conservatism in terms of government spending (which does not mean "cut everything", but rather "fund responsibly"), social liberalism in terms of personal freedoms, but increased restriction of corporations, and no deregulation. Put another way, in my view, personal freedom applies to a person acting as a person. As soon as you have the corporate veil protecting you from personal responsibility for your actions, the corporation should cease to have those same rights.

      Here are a few of the higher level axes, each of which contains several areas that fall under it.

      • Individual freedom vs. strict government control
        • Domestic spying vs. not
        • Abortion rights vs. not
        • Regulations on drugs, alcohol, etc. vs. not
        • Regulations on whether you can work on Sundays or not
      • Government spending vs. government saving
        • Spending on arts vs. not
        • Spending on defense vs. not
        • Spending on education vs. not
        • Spending on social programs vs. not
      • Socialism/government-run corporations vs. capitalism
        • Government-run corporations that can't help being monopolies vs. not
        • Government-run essential services vs. private
        • Social security vs. private investment
        • Other corporations
      • Government control over corporations
        • Trust busting vs. trusting the market
        • Limitations on collusion vs. trusting the market
        • Product safety vs. laissez faire
        • Consumer rights laws and warranty laws vs. laissez faire
        • Trade tariffs vs. free imports
        • Taxation of foreign income vs. not

      And those are just some of the many areas that people disagree about. And although many people will have the same leaning about most of the things in each of the larger groups, that still gives you a minimum of four political axes instead of just one or even two.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  2. democrat != left by RLiegh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously -in the US we have two parties. The far right party, and the psychopathic kill-and-censor-everyone-in-the-name-of-patriotism party.

    In practical terms, we have no left. This article is BS.

  3. can you mark an entire article TROLL? by citylivin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Come on editors, i know you desperately want to talk about american politics, but isn't that what the poll to the right is for?

    Who needs a big stupid flamewar? No one but Ralph Nader leans LEFT in the usa ANYWAYS!

    --
    As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
  4. As has been said, reality has a liberal bias. by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Note I said "liberal", not "progressive", not "Democratic Party", not either libertarian or "Libertarian".

    The problem is that too many people confuse "fiscal responsibility" with "conservatism". Fiscal policy is separate from "liberal" and "conservative". I am *EXTREMELY* fiscally 'conservative'. But I'm also *EXTREMELY* liberal.

    In fact, one could even argue that fiscal responsibility is, itself, liberal by definition.

    --
    Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
    The purpose of that site was not known.
    1. Re:As has been said, reality has a liberal bias. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, just for Muslims. There are plenty of others who don't integrate.

      Muslims are disproportionally highly represented among those who don't integrate. So what if there are a few odd other folk? They don't make a difference, just as they never did. But mass immigration into Europe these days is mostly Muslim, and it's the "mass" part that causes problems in conjunction with "non-integration" part. Separately, neither is really a problem.

  5. Re:Big Tech employees by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Big Corp wants nothing to do with capitalism or free markets.

    Big Corp wants Big Government around to regulate their competitors out of existence and bail them out when they get into trouble.

    A few months of actual free market capitalism would destroy most of the big corporations.

    Note that, rhetoric to the contrary, neither major party has done anything to shrink the government in at least the last quarter century.

  6. Liar. by copponex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So far in 2010, the oil and gas industries have contributed $12.8 million to all candidates, with 71% of that money going to Republicans. During the 2008 election cycle, 77% of the industry's $35.6 million in contributions went to Republicans, and in the 2008 presidential contest, Republican candidate Sen. John McCain received more than twice as much money from the oil and gas industries as Obama: McCain collected $2.4 million; Obama, $898,000.

    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_05/023945.php

    Sure, you can single out Exxon and Obama in 2008, because that's the exception to the rule you're pretending doesn't exist.

  7. Let's see, smarter, better educated = more liberal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People complain that our universities, urban elite, etc. 'lean left'. Now let's see, the smarter and better educated you are, the more liberal you are. What does that suggest to you?

    It suggests to me that we have too many ignoramuses, who lack the education and experience to learn to deal with different kinds of people, to understand how progress is made, and to be informed or to deal with complicated policy issues like global warming. And those ignoramuses are called "conservatives".

     

  8. Re:Liberal by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Our "leftists" could not even manage a public option for insurance coverage so that takes your first point right out, and our right-wingers support jailing people for victimless crimes so there goes the other.

  9. Re:More obvious stories by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All corporations lean to the right. The article is a troll piece, based on the misinformed notion that the Democrat party is "left wing" as opposed to "right of center." Both Democrats and Republicans have been receiving enormous corporate campaign contributions for the past 4 decades, and unsurprisingly, both parties have drifted further to the right. The Republicans are just more honest about being right wing; the Democrats continue to present a public face that says, "Hey, we're the left wing! Really, we swear!" I would guess that this is part of an effort to ensure that the actual left wing parties in America never get enough votes to make a difference. The mainstream media -- big corporate contributors to the Democrat party -- work to further the "Democrats are the left wing" image as well, probably because the real left wing parties might not be as friendly toward business interests.

    In case you have any doubt, remember that it was a Democrat president who signed the DMCA into law, it is Democrats who are pushing for ever stronger copyrights, and that like the Republicans, Democrats continue to push forward an agenda of "corporate interests first," and continue to try to spread that agenda to other countries. As for the media, well, when a left wing group wanted to pay NBC to run an advertisement that encouraged people to spend no money for just one day, as part of a general anti-corporation campaign, NBC refused to air the ad -- despite the fact that the group was willing to pay the same price as every other advertiser -- because the ad ran counter to US economic policy.

    Not that any of this should come as a surprise. After all, corporations exist for the purpose of realizing profits, so why would a corporation ever support a political party or movement that works against the system that has allowed corporations to become as big, powerful, and profitable as they are today?

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  10. Re:More obvious stories by SETIGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not terribly insightful, Exxon is prohibited by law from donating money directly to the candidates or parties but can give unlimited funds to 501(c)4 and 501(c)3 groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce or Americans for Prosperity without needing to disclose such contributions

    FTFY. HTH. HAND.

  11. Thanks! From your Republican and Democrat friends by superdave80 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I didn't vote for a third party candidate because not voting is just as effective.

    And the Republicans and Democrats both thank you for continuing to prevent any competition.

    I'm always amazed at people who believe the "voting for a 3rd party is like throwing your vote away". Are you really saying that because your particular candidate didn't win, that you wasted your vote?

    I had a conversation with a co-worker about our recent vote. I said that I had voted Libertarian (Bob Barr) for president. He laughed and claimed that I wasted my vote. I then asked him who HE had voted for. He then stopped laughing and quietly mumbled, "John McCain". I then proceeded to laugh, as we live in California, and Barr and McCain had roughly the same chances of winning the state (about 0% chance). Was his vote for McCain a "wasted vote", simply because McCain didn't win? Or was his vote OK, since it fell into your acceptable category of being a (R) or a (D)?

  12. Re:Moderate/Conservatives are the quiet majority by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think Americans need *no* political party. They should legislate and govern on a per issue bases. It's the fact that we have "big politco's" that I think is the problem.

    You see, I've come to believe that many Americans simply pick a party based on one or two beliefs they hold most strongly and then vote for that party, regardless of all the other beliefs they may or may not agree with.

    An example: An LGBT person probably supports LGBT rights. This might, in fact, be the one issue they really care about. Because of this they might vote Democratic because they're known for supporting popular LGBT "gay" rights like marriage. This can be in spite of the fact that they might not support any other issues the party supports.

    I'd rather see the whole system stripped down to "the issues"(tm) and not "the party". Of course, there's also the fact that Representatives simply don't Represent anymore. Instead, they get elected and then vote THEIR beliefs (which often include their belief to keep their job by voting how the party wants them to vote so they can fund their next re-election campaign with all the bull-shit and spin that includes). That leads to simply trying to vote for someone who's "most likely to vote how I would vote" and that's too bad.

    And this isn't to excuse the voters either. Very few people actually speak up and call/write their Reps. Though, that's not to say if they do, they'll listen. There's been some cases where it's been clear that Reps. are Rep-ing and we'll see them with a new job in a few weeks. (I won't say they'll be unemployed because ex-congress-people end up becoming consultants / lobbyists for special interests because they know how things work and who to talk to, so they'll still be making boat loads of money).

    Of course, the whole thing is far more complex than just that, but that's just my recent thoughts.

    Things have just gotten too "sporty" in terms of politics. It's like you have to support your "team" no matter what, and you can't agree the other team has some good ideas, simply because it's the other team. This shit isn't suppose to be a fucking competition. We're all suppose to be on the same team here.

  13. Re:Reality Has a Well Known Liberal Bias by jbeach · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The "psychologist" may just not want to say it. Not only because it's subjective, but also because it's probably accurate. The specific kind of smarts is a genuinely evidence-based smartness, as opposed to a rationalization-to-support-the-status-quo sort of cleverness. This by itself means that those offended will find all sorts of reasons to not listen, and instead rationalize how bad/liberal the psychologist is.

    --
    The Invisible Hand of the Free Market is what punches workers in the nuts.
  14. Re:As a hillbilly from a desert island, I have to by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know the feeling, my GF is half Indian (Navajo to be exact) and when we are out the locals will sometime just start speaking Spanish to her thinking she is Mexican. She just blushes and says no habla but I just love how her brother handles it "Me no Mexican, me Indian. Me scalp your kind!" . Maybe it's different here (north AR) surrounded by the military bases, but we always laughed our asses off at the idiot racists like the klan, who last I heard are hiding out on a hill in Boone county, because the thought that anyone here was "white" was about as stupid as saying my dog was anything other than a mutt. Here every race has mingled with every race (or as I like to call it "Forget fighting, let's just screw") so much there isn't a pure ANYTHING anymore. I look white but am actually Irish, English, German, Two kinds of Indian (Comanche and Creek) and Cajun, which of course is pretty much any race that ever stepped through Louisiana. My girl looks Mexican but is just as much a mix as me, so the thought that anyone still judges based on "race" is kinda just silly to me.

    As for TFA, it is nice to see that some put their money where they believe, and not just on the bottom line. We have had pretty much constant tax breaks for the top 3% for the past 30 years, and are worse off than ever before. I can drive through entire towns nearby that are nothing but empty factories and boarded up homes, The level of unemployment is frankly just insane, and if it wasn't for the dems extending unemployment benefits I know quite a few that would be living in their cars, not because they don't want to work, but simply because there isn't any work to be had while they push for more and more education while at the same time expect us to be able to compete with someone who paid $5k for their degree compared to our $70k, it is just nuts. It is just simple math folks, you can't have these ever growing huge masses of unemployed without it blowing up in your face. Just look at what happened to Germany in the 30s, the fascists basically came to power by offering "bread and jobs" and the people went along. Right now you have huge masses that simply don't believe in the American Dream anymore, and they grow more numerous every day. Things simply have to change, period.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.