It's a bit disingenuous to suggest that devaluing women, minorities, and foreigners is merely a difference in political views. It's an outright abandonment of human decency that is central to the professional ethics of western society and more.

That's not a mainstream political view for anyone today.

Western society?

I wonder which venues such implicit denigration of non-eurocentric culture could get you banned from.

Your worldview is threatening to me and every other freedom-loving individual. That is my feeling.

For the record, I think modern politics is total garbage. Republican, Democrat, it's all the same coin. I believe in equality, not equity, and I believe in equal rights. This mindset that some people are more deserving of rights than others based on how marginalized they are, should be antithetical to modern progressive thought, instead it's become infected by it.

that's a misleading defintion of "progressive thought". If you're gonna disagree with it, at least disagree with what people are actually saying.

It's more defined by rectifying historical injustices rather than giving more rights to some over others.

"rectifying historical injustices"

This is a problem. History happened. Those people are long gone. We should focus on being fair and creating equal opportunity for people today, not discriminating because of some random sample of events at a time and place way beyond anyone currently living.

Yeah, I’m not sure those two things are very different. History happened, it’s still happening. The Republican Party is still disenfranchising black voters as they did in history. Black people with equal education and training still find it harder to get jobs than white people, as they did in history. You can’t chuck history out of the window if you wanna create equal opportunities because history is what’s created the unfair system we live in today.

I doubt your claims are true with record low unemployment across every category and voting participation increasing.

But if they are, then change the policies that affect people today. Making up policies based on what happened centuries ago fixes nothing.

Awwww... I don’t think I’ve ever met someone that’s eaten one of Trump’s talking points in the wild before.

So, firstly Martin Luther King was assassinated for fighting for civil rights only 51 years ago. So you might wanna get your time line sorted. When you say “centuries” I reckon you’re talking about slavery, which ended in America about 150 years ago, which also technically isn’t even a multiple of centuries yet, so maybe you wanna look into that also.

Secondly it is actually exactly the policies that MLK was fighting against that still have their effects on black communities today. Segregation, underfunded school districts, black disenfranchisement, these things are still going on. They don’t just disappear when the laws change, you know. The result of centuries (yes multiple) of mismanagement and mistreatment don’t disappear in decades.

Lastly, it’s great that the black white unemployment gap has closed a little bit, but it’s not clear that this is a result of directed policy to achieve that. Currently we’re living in a time of extremely low interest rates and decent public spending. Anyone who wants money can get money cheap right now, which has helped aid extremely low unemployment generally. It’s a risk though, because the national debt has ballooned and this policy if not properly regulated can easily precipitate a recession. Low unemployment is a nice side effect though.

I'm not saying that's what "progressive thought" is. I'm saying that it's become infected by this mindset, making today's progressive movement share a lot in behavior with fascists and with people like Joseph McCarthy.

"Rectifying historical injustices" is by itself a meaningless phrase, as there are many ways to do this, some of which unduly affect others, and some of which don't.

It’s only a meaningless phrase if you’re motivated to interpret it in ways that are unhelpful. In that sense every phrase is a meaningless phrase until you get some details added to it.

Then perhaps you should not go. I am not threatened, nor do I think any one else is really threatened at all, in any reasonable sense anyway. Why should your discomfort trump mine and the MAGA hat wearers desire to interact in this venue?

That right there is precisely why the organizers had to take action. They want to cultivate a conference where diverse attendees don't feel like they have to make a choice between participating in an important professional and staying away from hostile actors. It ruins the atmosphere of the event.

"hostile actors"

Seriously? What exactly are these actors going to do?

A MAGA hat is not dissimilar to a nazi symbol, albeit to a much lesser degree. You wouldn’t want Nazis around even if you knew they weren’t gonna do anything. Just having people around that devalue other human beings as lesser than them is enough.

Your stunning lack of intellectual charity aside, other people's discomfort is not an unlimited license to disrupt a individual's ability to conduct their business and participate in society. I am no lawyer, but I wouldn't be surprised if Mr. Wood (and Mr. Somnez, for that matter) has a case for something like tortuous interference.

As it happens, Charles Wood is by all accounts a very decent person, whereas the folks who complained to the Linux Foundation have a public history of abusive and bigoted behavior. That you would think so little of his character, while saying nothing of his interlocutors, is pretty ridiculous.

I didn’t say anything about his character. I don’t know anything about his interlocutors. Both of those things are kind of irrelevant to my post which is about the hat.

Oh, you've said plenty about his character. You've implied that he devalues other human beings, that he is lying about his (lack of) support for Trump, and suggested that he was "suspiciously" unaware of how taking a picture wearing a Trump hat would be perceived (whatever "suspiciously" is implying in this context).

Yet, if you actually look at his behavior, and the remarks of those who came to his defense, you might see that you were being presumptuous. You might then update your mental model of people who wear MAGA hats, and whether their presence would be a problem at a technology conference.

It also seems rather silly to analyze the symbolic significance and racist undertones of some guy wearing a MAGA hat once, when the people who complained about him to the Linux Foundation were openly attacking Mr. Wood on the basis of his race and sex.

For what it’s worth, there’s a picture of me wearing a MAGA hat out there on the internet too. Ironically, of course, but I do sympathise with the guy. I do think it’s out of order for the Linux Foundation to ban him for this (although they claim there are other reasons).

That aside, this doesn’t mean I think he’s a good guy. From what I gather he seems like a normalish dude, maybe a little troll-ish, but I mean we all enjoy a good troll every now and then. I can’t hold that against him. But there’s no chance he wasn’t aware of the symbolism of posting that picture when he did. He pretends he doesn’t, but you’d have to be a fool to accept that.

I doubt he’s a Trump supporter or a racist, but even if he was I don’t think that’s good enough grounds to ban him unless there was good reason to think he was going to be a disruptive presence.

I decided to put all my cards on the table here because I’m a bit disturbed by the idea that you think that he was banned because he’s a white man? Banned by an organisation that is run largely by white men? Just trying to figure out how this works in your head.

Is it the white men on the board that hate him for being white? Is it the Asian men on the board that hate him for being white? Or is it the white women on the board that hate him for being white?

If you could clear that up, it’d be cool.

"It ruins the atmosphere of the event."

That's exactly what was said of allowing African-Americans into white theaters and restaurants in the Jim Crow south.

Major difference here being that black people weren’t allowed in because the hosts had unfair predujices, while people with MAGA hats aren’t allowed in because the people wearing them have unfair prejudices.

Subtle but important difference.

Of course, some people might be wearing MAGA hats and be unaware of Trumps demonisation of immigrants, banning Muslims, alleged (and admitted) attacks on women and refusal (initially at least) to condemn the KKK, Nazis and white supremacists, but I’m gonna go out on a limb and assume most of them have an inkling of this.

The man had a picture taken once with a MAGA hat. That does not make him a danger to society. Most likely no one but the person who so venomously reported him would even know that he is a Trump supporter during the conference. This is all lunacy.

This is just so hilariously wrong. The man isn't even a Trump supporter, not that would in anyway justify this witch hunt, but read for your self:

https://twitter.com/cmaxw/status/800385886479323136?lang=en

Surely we reached peak SJW imperialism and its time to roll this crap back.

I mean, I suppose we’ll never know what’s in his mind, but he seems suspiciously unaware of how much people would find that picture disturbing. Almost like in 2016 no one thought there was anything weird about Trump at all.

He could be a Trump supporter, but is actually trolling. He could be trolling and not be a Trump supporter. Either way, it’s impossible to accept that he didn’t know that Trump was a controversial character in 2016.

> I mean, I suppose we’ll never know what’s in his mind, but he seems suspiciously unaware of how much people would find that picture disturbing.

Do you have any idea how many people would find your perspective disturbing?

I think you’ve lost the thread. I’m not pretending I don’t know how much people would find my perspective disturbing like he was.

That said, no. I don’t.

So the MAGA hat was just a prop for a Trump Tower picture?? The man didn't even vote for Trump! This whole debacle gets more enraging by the hour.

I mean, I wouldn’t take him at his word.

Wouldn't the MAGA hat wearer bring diversity to the meeting as well? I for one would be interested in learning why someone intelligent would support Trump.

Look, this sort of thing is unsustainable. If you interact with a large group, someone, somewhere, is going to wear, say or think something you do not approve of. It is a mathematical certainty and part and parcel of the human condition. Far from a problem, this is good, its through differences and debate that we grow, we learn and maybe come together.

This SJW culture on the other hand is all wrong. Its weak, fragile, authoritarian and self-righteous, even as it contradicts itself. It is profoundly un-American, and it does does nothing but weaken and divide us all.

SWJ is not even like a normal cancer that attacks the host, it is so incoherent that many times it even attacks itself.

Perhaps if you got to know the people you fear and disparage better, you might not feel so threatened?