The alternative to 'politics in the workplace' isn't really no politics in the workplace. Its unchallenged politics of whoever established the company culture.

And anything thats unchallenged is going to slowly devolve until it's unfit for purpose.

Have you been in an apolitical workplace? I see this idea a lot, and it's very hard for me to reconcile with my personal experience, where I've never felt like I'm endorsing or propagating the politics of the higher-ups. It's hard to see how I could be, since there's not a single person in my management chain where I know who they voted for or what kinds of political ideas they favor.

> Have you been in an apolitical workplace?

Well, yes. I only ran into it in the last decade or so.

Thinking back, it's interesting how utterly apolitical university was back in the day. About the closest we ever got to politics was the occasional and largely ignored pentecostal preacher.

I'm curious why more right-leaning folks don't see this as a free speech issue.

I consider myself a moderate, and by voting habit, almost fully left-wing. I do see it as a free speech issue in one sense, but in practice I only see free speech being allowed for certain viewpoints. For example if you work at Google or Facebook and you speak up against affirmative action hiring practices or transwomen in women's sports, you will be fired. The excuse will be that these opinions are "hate speech" or that they violate some policy of discrimination at work place or made someone feel "unsafe" or whatever else. If on the other hand, everyone is given the same psychological safety and ability to speak up, without any social or professional repercussions, that might be acceptable.

That said, I think a workplace where people freely argue with each other and try to make their political viewpoints "win" is going to be unproductive. Leaving out politics is appropriate because it focuses the company's efforts on providing a better product or service. I view time and resources spent on those political activities as unproductive and distracting for the workforce. So in a sense, being political at work seems like a performance issue to me. I know some people will use mental gymnastics to claim that being political is somehow beneficial to the company with vague arguments around diversity or attracting certain customers or whatever, but I don't personally find those justifications to be compelling, as they seem disconnected from the reality that apolitical companies and products do just fine.

It can be seen that way. But it can also be seen this way: I agreed to come work for this company, and now, I have to deal with unwanted evangelism from my coworkers. They should be free to say whatever they want on their own time, but I shouldn’t be forced to listen to it / deal with it when all I want to do is the damn job I signed up for.

Maybe it’s the captive audience that is the distinguishing factor. I’m not sure.

For example, I work on a software platform where our customers regularly host content that I find offensive and sometimes even disturbing. But I’m not forced to watch/listen to it, so I’m fine with it.

If you're into understanding Gramsci's thought and the long march through the institutions and its influence on modern American life, you might enjoy this essay from Stanford's Hoover Institute written 20 years ago, when all this was just getting started: https://www.hoover.org/research/why-there-culture-war

There's no details about this, however I believe it wasn't a "buyout incentive" it was a "don't talk shit about us" payment given that all the ex employees have only said things like: "After X years I've decided to leave basecamp."

In which case, not sure not offering the package would have gone well.

I genuinely hope DHH reads these comments, because I think he would be mortified.

Unfortunately he won’t read them.