Google tech employee fired for writing about Google's forced ineffective diversity programs and policies

By Ben Alonzo

Did anyone actually read James Damore’s Google paper? You might have heard about Google firing an engineer, James Damore, because of his supposedly anti-diversity paper that highlighted the hypocritical, unreasonable, and ineffectiveness of Google’s extreme political biases and hostile work environment. As usual, the sensational media and social media lynch mobs were ready for their marching orders: assassinate his character and don’t bother actually reading his document. It might surprise people that Damore’s paper wasn’t anti-diversity at all. In fact, there’s ample science research supports the facts he stated. He links directly to science research to support each of his points. Ironically, Google may have proved all of his points by firing him. A diverse workplace is natural, not forced. We should be open to discussion based in science, not just pick and choose the parts we like in the name of political correctness.

Google’s Hostile Politically Correct Workplace

The recent “manifesto” about Google has many reasonable people thinking twice about the effectiveness of forced “diversity” programs in the tech industry. It’s a complicated matter because the word diversity itself sounds good so who can be against it? However, digging deeper and reading what actual science says about these diversity programs actually presents interesting findings: they are ineffective or result in the opposite effect.

Google is a large company and they are certainly worried about their public image. In some ways, can you blame them, if they have to consider the huge politically correct base? They also know the sensational media is constantly looking for blood. As a public relations matter, sometimes image becomes more important than reason or facts. This might be the case with a recently fired Google engineer. James Damore was a software engineer at Google. Damore has a PhD from Harvard in systems biology. He seems to be a very smart guy that can clearly communicate thoughts. Apparently, he wrote a paper named “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber.” The paper quickly made its way to social media, over this past weekend, eventually leading to Google firing him and accusing him of “perpetuating racial stereotypes.” Google seems to be silencing the very bright minds they seek to hire — oh the irony.

Personal Challenge: Read Damore’s paper here, before making any judgments about him. Be sure to also click on the scientific links he provides that back up his opinion.

Nobody is saying that inequalities or gaps of income and skills don’t exist. The issue is why they exist and what if anything can be done about it. There’s also a cognitive dissonance among professionals, a sensational media, perpetually outraged public that reacts with emotion, instead of reason or logic, and a pick-and-choose attitude towards what science says about these matters, which complicates measuring for diversity and intervention solutions. Science says that the most extreme forced diversity programs actually lead to the opposite and ultimately leads to a hostile work environment where people are afraid of consequences for independent thoughts.

When someone presents an argument backed up with facts, it should cause someone to at least consider it. This Google employee had linked to several scientific journals that presented entire research findings that strongly supported what he was saying.

America needs more science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) experts. Experts are people that are demonstrably skilled in critical areas with the knowledge, skills, and ability combinations that can lead to future innovations, solving important problems, and improving the quality of life. Our future and national security depend on intrinsic expertise from our own citizens. Our intellectual, productivity, and economic position in the global perspective also depends on whether we progress or regress.

We need more computer programmers and scientists that are actually competent. We need more technology experts because our everyday lives now depend on it. We need more competent men and women in the tech industry. How we achieve this is up for debate, but that debate should focus on objective legitimate facts, not baseless emotion and giving into political correctness. Are you hiring tech experts because of their knowledge, skills, and abilities, or just because of their skin color, gender, or sexual identity?

When I first heard of this guy getting fired, I just saw all of these headlines calling him names and making him out to be some kind of Nazi ultra-conservative idiot. Thankfully, I didn’t react out of political correctness or outrage. I reacted by actually reading his paper, reading the science journal sources he linked to, and then doing my own research in the academic journals. I found that science research largely supports his statements. It became evident that this is another case of the perpetually outraged, politically correct culture attacking its next victim because he presented independent thought. This reeks of totalitarianism and unlawful character assassination.

It’s really unfortunate that people would want to destroy the life and reputation of a person just for voicing a scientific opinion that is based on factual findings. I’ve grown to accept that this is the country we live in, but hope that one day we can actually fully embrace science, stop playing the political correctness game, and actually achieve great things.

We live in a society that is still based in popular culture thoughts, subjectivity, political correctness, and overly emotional reactionary behavior. Our tech industry continues to desperately respond to the pressure from the culture of political correctness to appease the masses, even if it means unreasonable and extreme forced diversity policies. Since there is an apparent difference between males and females in the tech industry, the politically correct see this as a call to use force, use any means necessary, and do it as soon as possible. The larger your company is, the more pressure you will feel.

Ideas that are not based in any scientific matter of fact are largely ineffective, cause more harm than good, and can cause a country to intellectually regress. Science is objective and doesn’t care about personal feelings. Somehow, in 2017, there is a culture that just invents new terms and then demands everyone to accept them as facts, regardless of what science says.

For example, Damore links to scientific journal research that clearly said the term “microaggression” is unscientific, has no evidence to support it, and that actual scientists had recommended the American public and educators drop the term “microaggressions” from any kind of training material.

It’s one thing to make a claim or have an opinion, but it’s something entirely different to have lots of evidence backing it up. When there is ample evidence to support an opinion in the form of matters of fact, any reasonable, rational, logical person should be able to accept it.

Facts, reason, logic, and science don’t mean much to a sensational media and perpetually outraged mass of public that’s constantly ready to lynch the next victim.

It seems many American political figures and “journalists” constantly claim they “love science”, but in actuality it’s more like they pick and choose only the science they like or agree with. If any part of science says something opposite to their personal biases or political correctness, they ignore it and demonize anyone that dares to have an open discussion about the matter.

Ironically, Google proved Damore’s point by firing him and publicly lynching him. Further, the media, and ignorant people outraged on social media, are spreading blatantly false information about him. It seems as if very few actually read his original document, which was supported by numerous scientific sources (facts). The media and a large amount of the American public seem to be more concerned with political correctness and an echo chamber of unreasonable, illogical, pseudoscientific, feel-good subjectivity that is rooted in overly emotional behavior.

How can we truly progress as a modern society, if we are unwilling to allow open discussion or differing opinions?
We are extremely hypocritical when we boast about our diversity and psychological safety policies, but then, at the same time, ruin the lives and publicly shame anyone that disagrees with us. These are legitimate questions to ask.

There are too many people claiming that any possible gap that is identified in an employment statistic is automatically due to sexism or racism. We need to recognize that human nature, science itself clearly indicates there are indeed scientific differences between males and females. Similarities may exist, but we cannot deny the fact that differences do as well. These differences can certainly play into how income and skills are distributed.

To the people that want to pick and choose some parts of science: either fully embrace science or stop pretending like you care about it. Facts do not care about feelings. This is one of America’s problems: feelings are more important than facts.

It seems as if this is another case of blind outrage by a politically correct, dumbed-down culture. If you actually read the initial document and checked his supporting sources, there’s no way a rational human could come to the conclusion that this guy was anti-diversity, racist, or any other negative descriptor. He certainly doesn’t deserve to be fired or lynched. If he wrote something else, I would like to consider that as well, but the paper referenced above doesn’t indicate in any way that he was a bad person or deserved to have his life destroyed.

Damore clearly highlighted some significant problems with Google’s (and the tech industry) artificial diversity and harmful employment biases. It’s not only his opinion, he backed most of what the said up with direct links to scientific sources.

A hiring process should focus on the content of one’s character, not their skin color or gender. Forced “diversity” is often sold to the public as a way to close inequality gaps, but it almost always leads to the opposite. Science seems to also suggest that diversity programs have little to no intellectual or performance value. Science also says that so-called diversity programs may have questionable long-term impacts, are forgotten after a few days, lead to backlash, or don’t have enough measured success to gauge effectiveness 1,2,3,4,5.

Despite these facts, there are still people that refuse to acknowledge reality, scientific facts, and will instead appeal to emotions and perpetual outrage. Bad things happen when a society lynches those that dare to question, research, or improve a process.

True progress is marked by open discussion of ideas. True diversity means not calling for the assassination of his/her character, firing a person, and engaging in public shaming just because that person presents an opposing view supported by modern science/facts. We live in such a politically correct society that is digging a deep hole, often pressuring companies to continue this regressive ideology of playing the politically correct game – there are no winners.

Perhaps this Harvard “Rethinking Political Correctness” research does the best job at describing what political correctness does in the workplace:

Our work suggests that high-quality relationships cannot be mandated. Sensitivity training and zero-tolerance policies at best impart some useful cultural knowledge or indicate that a company is serious about eliminating bias. At worst, such practices undermine relationships by reinforcing a restrictive and fearful atmosphere.

The way to achieve diversity is to allow it to naturally happen without using unscientific extreme measures to force it. Hire a person because of their knowledge, skills, and abilities, not because you were forced to reach a quota, their skin color, sexual identity, or gender. We might be creating more differences and inequality by refusing to acknowledge that there is always some amount of both existent in nature and throughout the history of the universe. We can improve the workplace environment within the tech industry, but we have to be reasonable about it and make sure our interventions aren’t actually doing more harm than good.

In the science and tech industry, people are afraid to think for themselves or dare to share ideas with others for fear of retaliation and punishment, which stifles productivity and innovation.

True diversity isn’t forced and a free society that fully embraces science shouldn’t have a problem with open discussion or different opinions. High-quality relationships cannot be mandated, they happen naturally. Sensitivity training at the extreme undermine the workplace by creating a restrictive and fearful atmosphere. Let’s stop playing the political correctness game because it will get us nowhere.

Author: Ben Alonzo is a unique scientist, tech expert, professor, and director of He’s CEO of the media-tech firm Storm Sector, LLC. Ben holds an M.S. in Information Technology, M.S. in Geoscience, M.S. in Nutrition and Health, and a B.S. in Geoscience. He’s a highly-rated professor that teaches earth science, environmental science, oceanography, meteorology, and public health. His diverse background spans numerous fields, network and computer systems, healthcare, weather forecasting, consumer electronics, computer programming, and web development. Ben holds numerous professional licenses and certifications, ranging from information technology to healthcare and emergency medical technician. He’s also an FAA-licensed private pilot that loves flying. He’s been writing about science and tech for over 10 years. You can see some of his past articles on the Houston Chronicle, eHow, Hearst, and other networks. In his free time, he loves scuba diving, traveling, storm chasing, producing videos and writing guitar music. More about author.

New: Follow Ben on his new social media: Instagram @benpro98 | Twitter @benpro98 

Share this: