[logicchains]

>Is Google inconsistent, or has their policy on how to deal with these things changed over the past few years?

Simple explanation is Google's Democrat-leaning leadership are more aligned with Bobb than Damore (in the US, the left are generally anti-Israel while the right support it, and the left are pro-affirmative-action while the right oppose it).

[zpeti]

This is the correct answer. The amount of anti-semitism shown during this recent Hamas Israel conflict in the woke left has been very worrying. We are likely to see a big resurgence of anti-semitism in the next period. It's more and more socially acceptable on the left.

[Macha]

I am curious how much actual vs perceived anti-semitism there is. I've seen more people conflate "Criticism of the state of Israel" with "criticism of Jewish people" and further still with "discrimination against Jewish people" than I have seen actual antisemitic sentiment on the left.

[antisemtexism]

Criticism of Israel's apartheid policies isn't antisemitism. It's such nonsense how the two have been conflated in recent years.

[javagram]

Street harassment or violence against visibly Jewish individuals has nothing to do with “criticism of Israel” though, and it did spike and has been increasing based on news articles and counts of reported incidents. https://www.jta.org/2021/05/21/united-states/antisemitism-in...

[xdennis]

Arabs in Israel have the same rights (and more than Arabs in Arab countries).

Where is the apartheid? Is letting the Palestinian Authority govern Gaza and the West Bank apartheid?

[zpeti]

Most of the stuff I've seen recently is not criticising the "apartheid policies" (debatable) of Israel. It's actual anti jewish rhetoric.

[whimsicalism]

Seriously, most of the stuff you've seen recently?

[antisemtexism]

Well, I've seen the opposite. I suspect it's not leftists you're witnessing saying such things.

[shadowgovt]

The simple explanation is not always correct.

Damore doubled down on defending the document and asserted his right to publish it. At that point, he made himself a walking Title VII violation and tied Google's hands. Whether management wanted to fire him or not, the legal cost of retaining him was going to exceed his value as an individual contributor.

As far as I can see, Bobb is doing everything he can to work with Google to avoid the further creation of a hostile work environment. It might not be enough, but for now it seems to be worth more to the company to keep him than to fire him.

There may be one aspect, however, where your observation about relative American tolerances for hostile-environment-creating speech matters. Hostile work environment is partially decided by fellow employee's reaction to behavior. If the average Googler is, in fact, less tolerant of biological essentialism than antisemitism, that could create a corporation where one speech is punished more hardly than the other. But I think we ought not to discount the reaction of the separate actors in these two stories once caught in the spotlight.