[derefr]

LinkedIn is a site built to help people socially-network in a way that optimizes for career advancement. Assuming market capitalism rather than cronyism, political discourse is anathema to career advancement. So, to the degree you’re using LinkedIn for what it’s for, you shouldn’t be discussing politics there.

Likewise, to the degree that your goal at your workplace is career advancement (and again, assuming meritocratic promotion over cronyism), you shouldn’t be having political discourse there, either.

But do note that “political discourse” has a specific meaning here—something is only political discourse if there are multiple potential positions likely to crop up in any discussion amongst arbitrary people in the room. If everyone in the room agrees on all the issues to the point that they think they’re “obvious”, then no political discourse is happening even if a normally-political issue is being discussed, so there is no risk of career impact. For example, discussing attending pride rallies in the break-room of an SF-based company is entirely safe. Hanging a patriotic slogan on the wall of your cubicle in a government organization is entirely safe. Etc.

This effect never applies if you’re posting your thoughts on the public Internet, though. There’s always someone “in the room” who disagrees, when the room contains 7bn people.