||I might feel pretty burnt around about now. The pseudo-libertarian rightwing nonsense people are preaching about Brendan Eich is sending me over the edge.
Yes, Brendan Eich invented Java and without it we’d have nothing to click on. Yes, he co-founded Mozilla, known for Firefox, an internet browser (with a shrinking market share.)
After two weeks as CEO of Mozilla, he flounced, taking all of the colorful marbles up in his head with him. Good luck, Mozilla.
Behind him, he left a toxic and corrosive cloud that poisoned the national discourse. Before the screen door even slammed on his way out, the pseudo-libertarian rightwing conjobbers were howling about an aggressive homofascist agenda. If it got Brendan Eich, who would the next victim be?
What a load of horseshit!
|This is a two-year old controversy over a political donation made six years ago. As this article from the LA Times shows, Brendan Eich’s contribution to the Anti-Marriage Equality initiative, Prop 8, blew up in the media in 2012. He survived it then and he never even bothered to make a public statement about it. As CEO, his position was in no more jeopardy now than it was two years ago. Instead of looking at the issues, some self-avowed liberals and progressives carelessly adopted a red herring promoted by rightwing regressives.
If the intense focus and criticism of Brendan Eich's Prop 8 donation didn't force him out of Mozilla two years ago, why would it now? From the LA Times piece linked above:
I expect the rabid rightwing to ignore Mozilla’s statement and Brendan Eich’s statement about the reason for his leaving. Rightwing regressives have a new and very specific ideology to push with regard to gay people:
A message that popped up on my phone a few days ago set me off:
Brendan Eich supported an unconstitutional and illegal initiative. It was ruled so in US District Court. The US Supreme Court issued a historic decision on June 26, 2013, rejecting an appeal with further instruction that affirmed the district court’s decision.
Should liberals and progressives have any sympathy for this individual’s right to his opinion? Americans think and believe what they like but some want to impose their particular beliefs and opinions on others leading to conflict.
Brendan Eich's freedom to believe what he likes was never in jeopardy. That's a red herring. He certainly has no right to expect anyone to agree with him or endorse his views, considering the courts' opinions on the matter. And he certainly has no right to expect his fellow citizens to remain silent about his beliefs. Anyone who has difficulty with the free-exchange of ideas isn't cut out for democracy. Note: Free-exchange means all voices are heard. It can get pretty rough but its suits most Americans. A thick skin and a level head are good accessories.
Should liberals and progressives defend Brendan Eich’s right to donate $1,000 to an initiative that would have denied a universal human right to a minority?
Absolutely not! There’s an issue here that somehow got lost. It’s about the advantage of privilege and class to access the political system and influence it with money. How could anyone miss that especially with the other Supreme Court decision from June 26, 2013, Windsor v United States? The case originated from a dispute with the Internal Revenue Service over a $363,053 tax liability incurred because Edith Windsor’s marriage wasn't recognized.
As a privileged white man earning $700,000 a year, Brendan Eich could easily afford a $1,000 contribution to keep the obvious financial advantages of marriage from people like Edith Windsor and also from many others who are denied those financial advantages and can’t afford a $1,000 political donation.
Where is social justice?
Here was a golden opportunity for liberals and progressives to wave the banner on an important issue. But some with the loudest voices distracted attention from social justice issues to promote the Heritage Foundation's red herring instead.
I have to wonder if another demographic minority instead of gay people was the object of such bigotry and hate whether the rightwing could have claimed persecution.
Was Brendan Eich forced out by mob rule? Is his story a real life version of “Lord of the Flies.” Fuck no!
The US District Court and US Supreme Court are on the side of people who spoke up about Brendan Eich’s bigotry. That’s not a mob. They had the rule of law on their side and every right to their opinion. He turned and ran. He flounced. A real leader doesn't do that. An 8 year-old boy named Cartman does. The situation could have been handled differently with communication, understanding, and sincerity.
But the rightwing wouldn't have been able to score any points off that.