from Hacker News

How Silicon Valley Treats a Trump Backer: Peter Thiel

by spuiszis on 10/20/16, 5:17 AM with 92 comments

• by DelaneyM on 10/20/16, 6:08 AM

  I'm a gay female entrepreneur. I would be happy to work with, or take investment from, Peter Thiel.

  I believe Peter Thiel is acting in what he believes to be the country's, or possibly the world's, best interests. I also believe that he's totally wrong. Lots of investors I've enjoyed working with before have been completely off-base about (and made much bigger investments in) major trends I've thought to be implausible, but I've been very happy with their guidance and support nonetheless.

  My opinion might be different if he explicitly supported some of the specific insane ramblings the Trump ticket has dished out recently. I'm not willing to work with an investor who wouldn't respect my marriage to my wife, or who doesn't think I deserve equal pay for equal work. But he's not saying those things; he's suggesting that, on balance, the world would be better off with Trump and a Republican presidency than Hillary and a Democratic white house. Heck, he might even be right, time will tell.

  Frankly, this whole thing has left me respecting Peter Thiel even more. He knew that the full weight of his peer group would fall on him when he spoke at the RNC and made this very public donation, but he did it anyways. Avoiding the typical VC herd mentality is child's play in comparison.

• by dannylandau on 10/20/16, 6:21 AM

  While this subject matter has been covered to exhaustion in a previous post, I believe it is a very dangerous slippery slope to boycott Peter Thiel. If one ostracizes a person based on their political beliefs (and contributions), then we will need to review every election going back decades. Just a few examples off the top of my head:

  1) Woodrow Wilson -- An avowed racist and segregationist

  2) Teddy Roosevelt -- Warmonger (War with spain)

  3) Franklin Roosevelt -- Fire bombing of Tokyo as retribution for Pearl Harbor, among other major civilian cities (and internment of Japanese Americans).

  4) Harry Truman -- Hiroshima and Nagasaki

  5) Dwight Eisenhower -- Korean War

  6) John F Kennedy -- Getting involved in Vietnam War

  7) Lyndon Johnson -- Continuing the War (Gulf of Tonkin)

  8) Richard Nixon -- Expanding war to Cambodia

  9) Ronald Regan -- Nicaragua, and other smaller wars, bombing of Qaddafi in Libya as well.

  10) George H. Bush -- 1st Iraq war

  11) Bill Clinton -- Bombing of Serbia, and launching missiles at Tunisia

  12) George W Bush -- Afghanistan and Iraq

  13) Obama -- Increasing Drone strikes 10x fold.

  Many progressives (Noam Chomsky et al) would consider the above actions corresponding to each president as rising to the level of war crimes. Hence, by this logic, anyone that voted for them is equally culpable. That's nonsense!

• by notliketherest on 10/20/16, 6:09 AM

  “We care deeply about diversity,” Mr. Zuckerberg wrote in an internal Facebook post to employees. “That’s easy to say when it means standing up for ideas you agree with. It’s a lot harder when it means standing up for the rights of people with different viewpoints to say what they care about. That’s even more important.”

  This could not be more on point. I respect Mark Zuckerberg more for saying this. We may not agree with what people say, but we should fight for their right to say it.

• by biztos on 10/20/16, 6:34 AM

  Here's the part I don't understand: Peter Thiel has been a high-profile supporter of Trump for a long time, long after Trump publicly said and did the things that make many people see his candidacy as an existential threat to American democracy.

  I don't recall any Silicon Valley lynch mobs forming in all that time.

  Nor was there much noise about Thiel's support after the sexual-assualt-brag tape was released.

  It's only when he gives money that people are up in (very virtual) arms.

  Either Thiel's support for Trump makes him a toxic partner, or it doesn't. If it does, and you just started acting on that recently, then please forgive me for suspecting you may be an opportunist.

  [edit: speling]

• by jacquesm on 10/20/16, 6:12 AM

  All those people trying to push/shame/blackmail YC (and others) into severing ties with Thiel are in my opinion worse than Thiel.

• by CN7R on 10/20/16, 6:25 AM

  Let's separate Peter Thiel the businessman and Peter Thiel the political donor. Whatever negative things he does in politics does not detract the achievements he accomplished in business.

  Following this belief—which is merely my opinion—people should not be asking his business contacts to explain his political actions. That belongs to the Republican voter base, and how they allowed a candidate such as Donald Trump to be the their presidential candidate in the first place.

  All of this publicity seems to be generated for opportunistic causes, where some business people (e.g. Ellen Pao) can feel morally correct even if they're not associated with Thiel.

  Edit: Also I find it ironic how people are trying to exclude, if I may use that term, a person criticized for supporting a candidate who is exclusive, under the justification of diversity.

• by meric on 10/20/16, 6:16 AM

  “We can’t create a culture that says it cares about diversity and then excludes almost half the country because they back a political candidate,” [Zuckerberg] wrote.

  I'm very relieved to hear this.

• by DVassallo on 10/20/16, 6:44 AM

  > "We can't create a culture that says it cares about diversity and then excludes almost half the country because they back a political candidate."

  In March 1933 half of Germany voted for Hitler's party[1]. Would Zuckerberg's statement stand in that scenario as well?

  [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election,_March...

• by hueving on 10/20/16, 6:19 AM

  >Earlier this week, Ellen Pao, the head of Project Include, an organization that is trying to increase diversity in the tech industry’s work force, said her group was severing ties with Y Combinator because of Mr. Thiel’s involvement.

  Isn't this the same person that went on a fishing campaign for free money from her employer under the guise of sexism? IIRC it was shot down by the courts and Y Combinator should have severed ties with her then since false accusations do much worse damage to the fight for equality than doing nothing at all.

  Where is the outrage over YC associating with her?

• by gotofritz on 10/20/16, 7:52 AM

  Freedom works both ways. He's free to voice his opinions and back it with money. We are free to ostracise him if we find those opinions horrifying.

• by MK999 on 10/20/16, 4:31 PM

  Maybe it just illustrates that tolerance is a sham and one ideology will conquer the others.

• by lovelearning on 10/20/16, 6:11 AM

  Googling this article title shows the article excerpt. But opening the search result shows a login dialog. Isn't this against Google's SEO rules?

• by anondon on 10/20/16, 6:06 AM

  Nytimes asks me to login to read the article.

  Edit: Opening the web link in a private window allowed me to read the article. Thanks.