Ticonderoga, I believe that you are leaping to conclusions. I did look at it; I have simply heard these arguments before, read the evidence in support of them, and found them lacking. James has not brought anything new to the table.
To take things to an extreme, I do not feel the need to get into a nuanced debate every time someone presents an argument for why we should institute the enslavement of the population of Americans with African ancestry. I have heard those arguments before, found them lacking and have moved on. If you want to accuse me of creating an echo chamber because of this go right ahead.
I also find Leon's argument as an employer to be unlikely in certain circumstances. To take another extreme, if a memo one of his employees wrote was circulated to Leon's customers or clients, suggesting that the company should advocate for the extermination of the Jewish population because it would increase profits, I have trouble believing that Leon would calm his infuriated patrons by saying look I encourage diversity of opinion at this company so I will not be firing this guy. In fact, patrons, I am grateful that he pointed out this possible was to improve this business.
Now obviously these are extreme examples, and James's paper does not go as far. But his paper is using flawed science to perpetuate stereotypes that I feel Google is right to flatly reject. It is not that they are quashing debate so much as those debates have already happened. So by continuing to bring up the issue all you are doing is harming employee morale and hurting the company in the realm of public opinion.