> There is no reason to think Google would be exempt.

Except that it did seem to be exempt, for much longer and while becoming much larger than I think most people would have imagined.

Google lost its varnish around the time it sought to fight Facebook with Plus. Around the time they released the Nexus 7.

I guess around the time Sundar became ascendant.

Sundar only became ascendant afterwards. When + was around, Vic Gundotra was in charge of that. Nexus 7 was released back when Andy Rubin was still firmly in charge of all things Android. I'd associate Sundar's ascendancy more with the shift from Nexus to Pixel and Android One, with the assistant, etc.

There is an interesting analogy. Two uranium hemispheres remain peaceful only until they are joined.

> There is no reason to think Google would be exempt.

It can be controlled in some way. If you only hire people from the same political pool, for example. Or getting them early enough (young enough) to shape them in a way that will lower internal tensions. Not every large company is burning in political fires.

> If you only hire people from the same political pool, for example.

That’s not possible. In fact, one of the best ways to stoke internal political fires is to make the mistake of convincing those holding the majority political viewpoint that they represent the viewpoint of the whole company.

Another option is to have a culture of not permitting political fires to be lit on company property. In other words, not talking about politics at work.