zlacker

[return to ""]
1. mrweas+(OP)[view] [source] 2026-01-13 16:50:11
I loved Dilbert, having worked for more than one Dilbert-like company the humor frequently resonated with me.

How or why Scott Adams went completely of the rails is perhaps something we'll sadly never understand. Was this opinions he'd always had, but suppressed, did he somehow become radicalized or was it perhaps medically induced, e.g. a stroke or something. It was incredibly sad to see him throw away his life's work and go down a path most of us at least hadn't foreseen and die having alienated his fans.

2. riazri+lf[view] [source] 2026-01-13 17:38:49
>>mrweas+(OP)
Did he go off the rails? My understanding is that the zeitgeist is taking people’s opposing views online and distorting them, removing context, to outrage our own audience and align it to our cause.

Almost everyone is reasonable, it’s the contexts that our reasons are relevant to, which are different.

◧◩
3. dangus+it[view] [source] 2026-01-13 18:26:44
>>riazri+lf
“The best advice I would give to white people is to get the hell away from black people“ -Scott Adams

Does that sound reasonable to you?

◧◩◪
4. sanity+Ja1[view] [source] 2026-01-13 21:12:38
>>dangus+it
If anyone cares about the truth he explained what happened in detail in an interview at the time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_bv1jfYYu4
◧◩◪◨
5. dangus+wC1[view] [source] 2026-01-13 23:15:45
>>sanity+Ja1
Most non-racists don’t need to spend 30 minutes on cable news explaining themselves to save face.

Saying something publicly is an action. Depending on what you say, you can’t take it back. If you tell your wife you think her friend is hot and you want a threesome you can’t take that back.

I also think you as the commenter should think a little bit about what motivates you to defend this guy. Why does he as a dead famous comic book author need his reputation defended? Why is it so important that we don’t see him as a racist asshole? What do you get out of that? Why not just let his own mistakes speak for themselves?

◧◩◪◨⬒
6. emmela+pN1[view] [source] 2026-01-14 00:11:38
>>dangus+wC1
> Most non-racists don’t need to spend 30 minutes on cable news explaining themselves to save face.

That's the sort of thing an Catholic inquisitor would say. Denial proves guilt!

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
7. dangus+Nm3[view] [source] 2026-01-14 14:38:50
>>emmela+pN1
Not really a great analogy but okay.

It’s not like Scott Adams did nothing wrong and was pulled in front of an inquisitor. He said weird shit and then had to play a game of PR damage control.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
8. sanity+AS3[view] [source] 2026-01-14 16:55:09
>>dangus+Nm3
If you spoke extemporaneously for an hour a day, every day, for years, and people went hunting for the most awkward or easily misinterpreted clip, I’m confident they’d find weird shit too.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
9. dangus+8N4[view] [source] 2026-01-14 19:56:45
>>sanity+AS3
If you truly believe that casual conversation will inevitably lead to any kind soul to speak a quote like that you have some serious warped morals.

It’s actually worse when you’re doing it as your job because you’re supposed to know better and be proficient at that craft. It’s not like someone hot micced him having a private conversation with his buddies, this was a man who had been interfacing with the public for decades.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
10. sanity+FS4[view] [source] 2026-01-14 20:13:31
>>dangus+8N4
A quote like what - saying it's a bad idea to hang around people who hate you because of your skin color?

The only people frothing about the mouth over it are people who hate him over politics, it's a convenient gotcha - nothing more.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
11. dangus+eN7[view] [source] 2026-01-15 15:08:19
>>sanity+FS4
I don’t see any froth around my mouth. I just think the guy sucked, and I think he was racist. Free country, I’m allowed to do that.

Give him a generous read on his opinions if that’s what you want to do. To me, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck.

Modern white supremacists don’t just come out and say things directly because of how it’s obviously reprehensible, they surround themselves with plausible deniability and murky language like the kind you are citing.

Let’s not forget: Scott Adams was a cartoonist. He was not some kind of sociologist or researcher on race relations. He went out of his way to go on a podcast and speak these opinions with no first hand experience or knowledge in any way.

He lived in Pleasanton, California where less than 2% of residents are black.

He has no experience or qualifications to know a damn thing about the subject. He didn’t even live near any black people - how would he know that they hate him?

No, he just wanted to say racist shit. That’s my read. If you read it different, that’s up to you.

[go to top]