[lacampbell]

The "privilege" here is that banning discussions about politics can be used as a tool to silence the opposition of the current status quo.

By definition there are two camps of opposition to the current status quo - one to the left of it, and one to the right of it.

Would you accept both sides of it being allowed to speak freely in tech companies, or just the side you are on?

[dragonwriter]

> By definition there are two camps of opposition to the current status quo - one to the left of it, and one to the right of it.

That is not true “by definition”. It would be true invariably (but still not by definition unless the conditions were also) if political variation were unidimensional, linear, and unbounded in actual (not merely potential) range.

[lacampbell]

It's pretty clear that the main, salient, tribal divide is between left and right. But I will agree to disagree there.

My key point is that if you open up the floor to politics so people can try and change the status quo, you open up the possibilities that people will want to change the status quo in a way that makes it even further away from where you think it should be.

When people advocate political discussion at work because they are against the status quo, I don't think that's a scenario they consider.