There's plenty of antagonizing language in Damore's memo.

Not to have to retype: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15022769

> Google’s left bias has created a politically correct monoculture that maintains its hold by shaming dissenters into silence

> but without evidence this is just veiled left ideology[7] that can irreparably harm Google [[ citation talks about Communist/Marxist ideals, directly equating Google with a Communist/Marxist organization ]]

> Google’s left leaning makes us blind to this bias and uncritical of its results, which we’re using to justify highly politicized programs.

> Discriminating just to increase the representation of women in tech is as misguided and biased [[ says this without citing any evidence at all of this happening ]]

The "tone" of the document is pretty aggressive, even if Damore throws a lot of fluff and "but I don't mean..." in the mix. In general it sets it up as "Left is bad and violent, Google is left, FIX IT."

Is it really that much different than a great deal of feminist propaganda, statements or actions? It doesn't mean the entire message is bs, or that there's no opportunity for discussion.

Please, quote feminist propaganda with the same level of invective that has been circulated at Google and maybe we have something to talk about. Otherwise, you are just trying to justify the author of a memo that was released at a work place by suggesting there's literature released elsewhere that is as inflammatory.

Here are some Googlers' responses on their internal G+: https://imgur.com/a/S48QN

Some go beyond propaganda and get close to calling for violence. Quotes include: "…you deserve what's coming to you." and "Yes this is silencing. I intend to silence these views. They are violently offensive."

As far as I know, none of these people were fired for their posts.

On the other hand, their names were leaked so that now alt-right trolls can make their life miserable. Don't you think that's a way of silencing people?

Sure, but that's a totally different argument. The one I was responding to was:

> Please, quote feminist propaganda with the same level of invective that has been circulated at Google and maybe we have something to talk about.

I showed a half-dozen examples of Googlers being far more insulting and threatening than Damore's memo. As far as I know, none of them were fired. The double-standard could not be more obvious. Damore was fired for the ideas he expressed, not the tone he used.

Well, if google were to open all their internal memo systems, I'm pretty sure one would be found...

edit: Also, I'm pretty sure there was internal "feedback" related to this memo that was equally hyperbolic towards the author.

You might view it as cherry picking (even though it's not the only line in the memo written with a condescending tone), but to me it is a big clue that the memo was not written in good faith to solicit discussion, but rather to push a pre-conceived agenda. As one of the interviewees says in the original article:

There’s a difference between “let’s have a discussion” and “let me tell you what’s up, all you wrong people.”

there are plenty of left-leaning memos and examples that show similar tone towards right-leaning and/or conservative or libertarian thinking. That doesn't imply not being open to discussion so much as showing one's bias. There's definitely a matter of levels to one's opinion, experience and yes, some level of conflict.

When going into a situation where you've been at the back hand of such bias, specifically in a workplace, it's often hard not to show at least some condescension. Look at any number of public feminist actions and statements, for example.

Yes, both sides do it. That does not justify or excuse it, especially if your goal is to encourage discussion.