Wow. You know, one of the worst things about our modern era is the way we all have to learn way more than we ever wanted to about the public figures who shape our culture. And then agonize over what to do when they publicly disgrace themselves.
One of the most disheartening transformations (or perhaps revelations) I've had to witness ha…
Wow. You know, one of the worst things about our modern era is the way we all have to learn way more than we ever wanted to about the public figures who shape our culture. And then agonize over what to do when they publicly disgrace themselves.
One of the most disheartening transformations (or perhaps revelations) I've had to witness has been that of Scott Adams. I was (am?) a *huge* fan of Dilbert. Bigly. I used to be one of those guys who always had the Dilbert daily calendar on his desk. I had so many discarded pages from it I used them for scrap paper when I needed to write something down. If you work in any kind of technical STEM field, Dilbert cartoons are ubiquitous — taped onto walls, pinned onto cubicle partitions, and most people can probably recite the punchline from a couple of their favorites.
And to be sure, I generally abhor cancellation for things people say. I am willing to give people every benefit of the doubt, and I accept all sincere apologies for irresponsible comments. But this was just indefensibly stupid of him — and the comments he made in his defense were even more idiotic:
“Everyone should be treated as an individual” (yeah, OK ...) and "you should absolutely be racist whenever it’s to your advantage." (eh ... come again ??) 🤨
"But you should also avoid any group that doesn’t respect you, even if there are people within the group who are fine ...” (que el f*ck?!?) 😳
The best I can tell is that he's fallen down the rabbit hole of "OK, progressives have diluted the term 'racism' (which we have), and condone a form of racism from left-wing extremists (which we sort of do, even though it's not quite the same as white-on-black racism) so I'm just going to think of racism as a no big deal thing that everyone's entitled to when it makes sense from a group perspective." People who fall victim to this line of thinking see a perverse egalitarianism in all of it: "See, I'm even saying it's OK for the blacks to be racist, too, when it makes sense for them! It's all good!"
Of course, how the hell Adams squares judging people as individuals yet avoiding an entire group even when some of them "are fine" is beyond me and probably anyone with an ounce of sense. What he's talking about here is the very essence of plain old fashioned racism, not the "racism lite" that gets Twitter's social justice brigade marching in lockstep. Whatever progressives may have done to abuse a term once reserved for the foulest of sentiments, doesn't justify embracing its original meaning as a good thing.
I absolutely believe in separating the art from the artist, and I don't think anyone should be judged for maintaining an affinity or appreciation for his past work. Admittedly, I haven't read it in years, since before his Trumpophile phase began, so I have no idea how much of his recent perspective has seeped into the comic as of late. But the Dilbert that I and millions of others once read, outside of the occasional jab at a progressive piety here or there, was offensive only if you were a corporate manager.
The problem is, I'm just not sure how easy it will be for me, personally, to separate them. It's going to be a while before I can look at Dilbert, and not see the sad spectacle of Scott Adams. The guy who always entertained me with his smart, incisive wit, yet has now become, inexplicably, a reactionary imbecile, and frankly just an asshole.
I was surprised to see that he lived in California. I figured he must live in Montana or some place with virtually no black people. Then again, he does live in a huge mansion, so maybe he doesn't need to get out much.
Wow. You know, one of the worst things about our modern era is the way we all have to learn way more than we ever wanted to about the public figures who shape our culture. And then agonize over what to do when they publicly disgrace themselves.
One of the most disheartening transformations (or perhaps revelations) I've had to witness has been that of Scott Adams. I was (am?) a *huge* fan of Dilbert. Bigly. I used to be one of those guys who always had the Dilbert daily calendar on his desk. I had so many discarded pages from it I used them for scrap paper when I needed to write something down. If you work in any kind of technical STEM field, Dilbert cartoons are ubiquitous — taped onto walls, pinned onto cubicle partitions, and most people can probably recite the punchline from a couple of their favorites.
And to be sure, I generally abhor cancellation for things people say. I am willing to give people every benefit of the doubt, and I accept all sincere apologies for irresponsible comments. But this was just indefensibly stupid of him — and the comments he made in his defense were even more idiotic:
“Everyone should be treated as an individual” (yeah, OK ...) and "you should absolutely be racist whenever it’s to your advantage." (eh ... come again ??) 🤨
"But you should also avoid any group that doesn’t respect you, even if there are people within the group who are fine ...” (que el f*ck?!?) 😳
The best I can tell is that he's fallen down the rabbit hole of "OK, progressives have diluted the term 'racism' (which we have), and condone a form of racism from left-wing extremists (which we sort of do, even though it's not quite the same as white-on-black racism) so I'm just going to think of racism as a no big deal thing that everyone's entitled to when it makes sense from a group perspective." People who fall victim to this line of thinking see a perverse egalitarianism in all of it: "See, I'm even saying it's OK for the blacks to be racist, too, when it makes sense for them! It's all good!"
Of course, how the hell Adams squares judging people as individuals yet avoiding an entire group even when some of them "are fine" is beyond me and probably anyone with an ounce of sense. What he's talking about here is the very essence of plain old fashioned racism, not the "racism lite" that gets Twitter's social justice brigade marching in lockstep. Whatever progressives may have done to abuse a term once reserved for the foulest of sentiments, doesn't justify embracing its original meaning as a good thing.
I absolutely believe in separating the art from the artist, and I don't think anyone should be judged for maintaining an affinity or appreciation for his past work. Admittedly, I haven't read it in years, since before his Trumpophile phase began, so I have no idea how much of his recent perspective has seeped into the comic as of late. But the Dilbert that I and millions of others once read, outside of the occasional jab at a progressive piety here or there, was offensive only if you were a corporate manager.
The problem is, I'm just not sure how easy it will be for me, personally, to separate them. It's going to be a while before I can look at Dilbert, and not see the sad spectacle of Scott Adams. The guy who always entertained me with his smart, incisive wit, yet has now become, inexplicably, a reactionary imbecile, and frankly just an asshole.
I was surprised to see that he lived in California. I figured he must live in Montana or some place with virtually no black people. Then again, he does live in a huge mansion, so maybe he doesn't need to get out much.