zlacker

Dilbert May 2, 2022 is provocative.

>>cosmic+(OP)
Can't argue with that, but Dilbert first appeared in 1989, and Adams publicly jumped the shark in February 2023. So May 2022 is hardly "always there".

>>lisper+T1
I think you are right on the "wasn't always there" front, though perhaps the commenter making the claim has some early work in mind.

Personally, the Reddit AMAs (including sock puppets) were a pre-2023 indicator of his enKanyefication. Endorsing Donald Trump (who encompasses the stupidity and lack of self-awareness of the Dilbert antagonists) was another, though this may have been driven by a need for money/relevance.

>>cosmic+(OP)
What was it?

>>nobody+25
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=The+One+joke

>>nobody+25
https://www.dailycartoonist.com/index.php/2022/05/03/dilbert...

>>cosmic+(OP)
Didn't he get dropped a year after that? The quote "the best advice I would give to white people is to get the hell away from black people, just get the f*k away... because there is no fixing this" happened in 2023.

>>cosmic+(OP)
Huh. I would have thought something like that would be in response to Rachel Dolezal, but the Wikipedia page for "Transracial (identity)" says her fifteen minutes of fame was way back in 2015.

>>cridde+Mc
Provocative, yes. Can someone ELI5 for me why this is racist?

I read it as mostly anti-trans (or at the very least, anti-"you pick your pronouns").

>>stickf+PL
The new hire appears to have been hired just purely because of the colour of his skin - apparently because of a diversity initiative. That strikes me as racist because it implies that they've never hired any non-white engineers due to their performance without addressing the inherent bias in the system that would only hire white engineers even when more qualified engineers of different ethnic backgrounds are available.

There's also the dig at people who wish to be known by certain pronouns/titles/names (e.g. "Ted" Cruz)

>>ndsipa+rU1
Typical DEI bullshit. They claim that DEI is critical to hire minorities, but then if you claim any one person was hired because of that policy the call you racist.

>>ndsipa+rU1
> The new hire appears to have been hired just purely because of the colour of his skin

It's explicitly stated. But isn't that the whole Dilbert schtick? The PHB is not supposed to be good. He represents the stupid side of Corporate America. And then when the black guy says "I identify as white", Corporate America doubles down on the stupidity.

"implies they've never hired..." seems to be reading an awful lot into it.

>>stickf+2a4
> "implies they've never hired..." seems to be reading an awful lot into it.

I believe that that was the first coloured person in the whole Dilbert strips, though I haven't checked that. I was a fan of Dilbert many years ago, but I suspect that if I re-read them that I'd be thinking of Scott Adams' later politics and looking for early signs. There's probably a lot of suspect cartoons that featured the Elbonians.