In China, you cannot criticize the government but you can talk all day about social issues, and you will actually hear a diverse range of different opinions on hot-button issues. I've heard all sorts of wacky and very interesting opinions, many of which have forced me to think deeply about my beliefs, when talking with people in Beijing.

I think you may be running into another facet of American culture and misinterpreting interactions through that lens. In America, you pick your tribe. If you don't like someone, don't hang out with them! Friendships tend to come and go based on your circumstances of the moment, and if they fade away, it's no big deal, you'll make new friends. While in China (and many other places in the world), you're born into a tribe, and people will make significant compromises to their individual happiness to maintain relationships. Many Asian families exhibit behavior that borders on child abuse by American standards and would result in a kid cutting that parent out of their life, while such a thing is basically unheard of in Chinese culture.

I've got one Chinese parent and my wife is full Taiwanese-American. This was an uncomfortable cultural difference for both of us to learn, and we still sometimes feel the loss of that social web. But American society makes more sense when you view relationships through the lens of "people only maintain them while it is mutually beneficial and fulfilling for both parties, and if one person doesn't feel like the relationship is worth it they'll end it, and so your actions better bring joy and fulfillment to those around you."

American business culture is the same as social culture: association is voluntary, and once either party no longer finds it worthwhile, bye. The flip side of that is that there's relatively little judgment attached to being fired. Future employers may ask a few extra questions to try to determine whether the factors that got you fired from your last job are likely to impact your performance in the next one, but if it really is a matter of cultural mismatch (like a difference in political opinions would be), then you can basically be sure that there is some company out there that doesn't care.

America has progressed through openness to ideological diversity, and through healthily engaging in debate. We're lucky that those who have created/promoted controversial technologies and ideas have been able to so legally, but what is it worth if they're never engaged with? What is all of our ethnic diversity worth if everyone, full of unique perspectives, is forced to tiptoe around most subjects?

It's great to have freedom of speech, but its societal value is substantially diminished when we aren't willing to communicate with the people it protects.

> UK allowed one Egyptian preacher to openly preach hatred and violence

As a side note, our freedom of speech in the US is more hard-wired and extensive than that of the UK, and even we don't allow speech that directly incites violence.

As long as you don't try to subvert the government or anything, you can talk about it.

Talking about it influences opinions, and when critical mass is reached, even autocratic governments sometimes are forced to abide by the consensus of their people.

Noone's claiming that China is a better or more progressive country btw, just that in this very specific regard, US is worse than China.

As I said in the rest of my post, I agree with you that there's more room for ideological diversity without being ostracized in many other places.

Scott Alexander wrote this great piece, I leave a link to it here: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything...

For instant enlightenment, search for the word "Bodhidharma" and read the short parable.

This isn't that hard! The trick is you have to start with an open mind and try to understand where they're coming from. That's true in every place in the US - you aren't going to convince people of your "truth" 99.5% of the time, you're only going to understand their truth.

However! Expecting everyone to want an open discussion or even to hear about your pet controversial topic will make your life hard no matter where you go unless people are pretty close to you politically.

Sam Altman is not concerned that a leftist can't have a sane discussion on this website. But he IS concerned that a bigoted racist can't be openly bigoted at work.

Weird. I wonder why it is that Sam Altman is so concerned about the rights of bigots to be openly bigoted? Definitely couldn't be related to his relationship with Peter Thiel. No way...

> Definitely couldn't be related to his relationship with Peter Thiel

You might have the arrow of causality reversed there. Also, please don't lash out personally. It's true that public figures are just cartoon characters in most people's minds, and you don't owe any better to cartoon characters, but you do owe better to this community if you're commenting here.

I've found most of HN willing to dive fairly deep on any topic as long as you remain respectful and don't present your self unwilling to actually reconsider your opinion. The problem is that all too often, assholes don't realize that how much an asshole they are comes across very clearly in how they present themselves or their ideas, and many people don't like interacting with assholes. The other problem is that we're all assholes sometimes.

And further, I've noticed that even the most anodyne comments here that express even slightly right-of-center views get heavily downvoted.

PC stifling of speech often gets laid at the feet of politics and academia, but the hyperbolic increase in thought-policing really seems to be a tech-related phenomenon intersecting with corporate priorities. There are a lot of people outside of tech and SF who are willing to discuss hard topics as long as everyone is willing to have skin in the game.

[1]although I acknowledge that there are a lot of women in Chinese tech and that the social dynamic is different, and suspect that they are more receptive to the idea of sex differences in occupational preferences.