Discussion
  • Read More
    MaWeiTaoHamilton Nolan
    7/31/15 2:07pm

    I’ve encountered people like these before. They endlessly espouse liberal ideology from the perspective that they’re part of the intelligensia and the rest of us need to pay our dues. We’re supposed to work our asses off, to sacrifice for the greater good. That greater good being themselves and their company.

    It’s always ironic to see openly liberal management engage in some of the most exploitative business practices in corporate America. Actually, this seems descriptive of much of Silicon Valley and NYC.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      MattMaWeiTao
      7/31/15 2:19pm

      Yep. I believe the term used for these types of liberals back in the day was ‘limousine liberals’. It describes a type of out-of-touch, always wealthy, liberal that likes to feel good about backing the right causes but will jump through hoops to avoid having to take any sort of action that might make an actual progressive impact, particularly if it comes even slightly at the expense of their own comfort.

      I think the current term for this is ‘neo-liberal’. Its kind of funny because ‘neo-conservative’ used to describe a type of conservative who took an even harder line than more traditional conservatives. Neo-conservatives were the fore-runners of what we typically call tea-partiers today. By contrast, neo-liberals are almost the exact opposite of this dynamic. You’d think that a neo-liberal would be more of a hard line, bordering on radical, type of liberal but its basically a term that describes someone who makes a big show about backing traditional liberal/progressive causes in word but not in deed. Hence, why you have a lot of neo-liberal politicians and pundits that love to wax poetic about police brutality and economic inequality in vague, liberal sounding terms but are firmly centrist in their policies and actions.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Cam/ronMaWeiTao
      7/31/15 2:23pm

      The way it usually works in the SF Bay Area is that you have lots of folks who ruthlessly run capitalist enterprises and once they make their riches, then they become supposedly altruistic, eco-minded, and spiritually enlightened liberals.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Jane-Claire QuigleyHamilton Nolan
    7/31/15 2:16pm

    “According to Salon’s earnings statement, Jeffers last year made over $440k including a $225k salary, a $100k bonus and stock option awards of $115k. Entry-level editorial employees are offered a $30k salary.” From here.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Zachary BosJane-Claire Quigley
      7/31/15 2:28pm

      Pardon my naivete. Why don’t they give his job to someone who can do a better job for less money?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Zsa Zsa GaborgJane-Claire Quigley
      7/31/15 2:52pm

      Honestly, that’s not a terrible ratio between entry-level and C-suite. Not that their writers shouldn’t make more money, but it's not like HuffPo or something

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    LordBurleighHamilton Nolan
    7/31/15 2:01pm

    Are they capitalists? If so: not progressive.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      1llamarampage will write againLordBurleigh
      7/31/15 2:05pm

      Also, there is no such thing as a true Scotsman, and the only good people are beautiful cinnamon rolls, too good for this world, too pure.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      underthetimgunnLordBurleigh
      7/31/15 2:08pm

      Simple fucking rule.

      It’s been really interesting explaining HamNo to people who don’t read the site.

      “Yes, he is paid by a company that takes advantage of tax loopholes by locating the business in the Cayman Islands, but he writes scathing pieces about the masturbatory media and evil capitalists and hypocritical politicos.”

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    JonowlesHamilton Nolan
    7/31/15 2:08pm

    Remember how all these publications took bold stands against unpaid internships - and then had to be shamed into eliminating their own unpaid internships? They’re progressive until there’s money on the line.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      nopunin10didJonowles
      7/31/15 5:43pm

      When it comes to making changes to major business practices, companies can get stuck in a scenario in which the first ones to do the right thing suffer.

      They can support a change, but they know that across-the-board change (that includes their competitors) is the only way to avoid unintended financial backlash from what would otherwise be positive change.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Cam/ronHamilton Nolan
    7/31/15 2:18pm

    Correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t progressives different from liberals? The last time I heard, progressives are to the left of liberals and to the right of socialists on the ideological spectrum. Or has the spectrum become more confusing since many liberals call themselves “progressives” because right-wing propaganda did a bang-up job of stigmatizing the word, “liberal”?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      flamingolingoCam/ron
      7/31/15 2:46pm

      These days, it’s the second thing, though “progressive” meant something specific back in the early 20th century. Nowadays, I think people to the left of liberals/progressives are just ‘leftists’.

      I once read a pretty interesting essay that illustrated the difference between ‘liberal’ and ‘progressive’ by comparing Colbert with Stewart.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      You might be wrong.Cam/ron
      7/31/15 2:58pm

      It’s that last thing, and it really only applies in the US. In much of Canadian provincial politics, for example, it’s the right wing mainstream party that has “Progressive” in their name. In Australia, it’s the “Liberal” party that’s on the right. These words are largely as meaningless as Republican and Democrat (which both used to occupy opposite positions on the spectrum) are.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    KyuzoHamilton Nolan
    7/31/15 2:20pm

    Why is unionizing considered part-and-parcel with liberalism? Maybe some of us want to negotiate our salaries and benefits ourselves, not along with 500 of our favorite co-workers. And still be “liberal.”

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      flamingolingoKyuzo
      7/31/15 2:51pm

      That’s like saying you don’t support reproductive rights because you wouldn’t personally get an abortion. You can choose not to join a union, but I don’t think you can call yourself a liberal if you are anti-union in principle.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    SpangarangHamilton Nolan
    7/31/15 2:09pm

    Management probably views themselves as such benevolent liberals that they would say, “Why do you even need a union?”

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      icewaterSpangarang
      7/31/15 2:21pm

      More likely, their response is that because this is “for the cause” the employees should be on board with sacrificing for the greater good.

      It’s the same in pretty much any organization on the left (see, for example, when workers at the Teamsters tried to organize with FAIR), and it’s easy to scoff and say “oh, those managers must be of the bad guys! the capitalists or the puppets that are put in charge!” but even the small ones, like small local political organizing nonprofits, do this routinely.

      And they can get away with it because there’s an abundance of people with the qualifications (to write at Salon or Buzzfeed for example), so it’s literally only a few business days of downtime if one person quits.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    UnderYetOverHamilton Nolan
    7/31/15 2:07pm

    According to this, their revenue is declining even though traffic is way up and they’re relying on cash infusions from board members.

    But how could traffic not be up with articles like this-

    Highlights of recent Salon headlines include: “ My Boyfriend Lives In A Dumpster ,” “ Human-On-Dolphin Sex Is Not Really That Weird ,” “ What A Beheading Feels Like ,” “ 10 Strangest Facts About Penises ,” “ My Bunny Ruined My Sex Life ,” “ Having Herpes Has Made My Sex Life Better ,” “ 10 More Strange Facts About Penises ,” and an essay by a woman who expected a marriage proposal from her boyfriend but instead got an offer for anal sex .

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      PeterFallowUnderYetOver
      7/31/15 2:14pm

      I clicked on the last one.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    robertogreenHamilton Nolan
    7/31/15 2:12pm

    buzzfeed is run by a guy who’s drunk quite a bit of koch-aid in the person of ben smith. peretti has no discernible politics i know of. why would you call buzzfeed liberal?

    huff post...yeah, mostly, though heterodox is more her style, and vaguely left heterodoxy is as far as she will go. hardly progressive.

    vice is maybe left-leaning libertarian, but the latter more than the former, so unless you know something about libertarians i don’t, good fucking luck with that argument.

    it’s not that i don’t support you or agree with your overall notion on this hamno, it’s just that your point isn’t well made with your ending. now, is The Nation organized? is In These Times? that’s closer to the edit

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      SpringSprungHamilton Nolan
      7/31/15 2:17pm

      Everyone’s a liberal until someone reaches into their pockets. Just like everyone’s an anti-government conservative until a hurricane washes away their city.

      Reply
      <