Dilbert creator lashes out after papers pull his strip: 'Dicey situation'

[thaibeachlovers]

On 2/27/2023 at 5:05 PM, Lorenzo Valla said:

An incredibly uninformed attempt at history.  White European involvement in slavery was a terrible and unfortunate aspect of our history that continues to reverberate to this day.  Nearly EVERY OTHER major society and civilization in HISTORY practiced slavery, some up until the 20th century.  (Where's the woke mob to pile on these countries?) It's a terrible chapter of for all of humanity to understand under present day circumstances.

Saudi abolished slavery in 1962. The black ex slaves couldn't be sent elsewhere, so it was not uncommon for me to see black African citizens when I was working there some years later.

 

I don't recall any protests before 1962 by concerned western people.

 

https://www.quora.com/When-was-slavery-abolished-in-Saudi-Arabia

Saudi abolished slavery in 1962 due to immense pressure from Britain.

[thaibeachlovers]

23 hours ago, James105 said:

 I am pondering whether people on the left are as stupid as they appear to be or are exactly the thing they claim not to be and want to go back to a time where racism was commonplace.

IMO they need something to protest about. If the world was perfect they'd be protesting that the clouds were too white, and should be multi coloured.

[Lorenzo Valla]

On 2/27/2023 at 7:08 PM, ozimoron said:

You know, 1st amendment and all that. The newspapers who "cancelled" him took a commercial decision as is their right under that amendment.

The savior/guardian's stamp of approval!  If you say something I agree with....yay, 1st Amendment!  If I disagree with something you say...'commercial decision' to cancel you.

 

The same 'commercial decisions' have resulted in Fox News dominating the American media market.  (An unfortunate fact that I wish weren't true.)

[Lorenzo Valla]

On 2/27/2023 at 8:06 PM, ozimoron said:

You underestimate people's knowledge of current affairs methinks.

 

Words that are racist are still racist no matter whose mouth they come out of.

All speech is free, but some speech is more free than others.

[Lorenzo Valla]

On 2/27/2023 at 8:31 PM, Bkk Brian said:

But its not about you, Rasmussen Poll interviewed black people and it does offend them. Rasmussen would be well aware of that, hence the outcome of the poll

The non-racist here to stereotype black people and claim to speak for them.  

 

Is there nothing the savior-guardians can't do?

[Chomper Higgot]

23 hours ago, James105 said:

What fresh nonsense is this?  An Ok gesture is racist as well now?   The narrative here should be that a significant percentage of black people in America take the view that it's not okay for people to be born with the immutable characteristic of white skin which is definitely, unquestionably, undoubtably a racist viewpoint, rather than the fact that a cartoonist put his head above the parapet and called this out for what this is - racism.   And giving the thumbs up or an ok gesture with your hand is as far from racism as I can possibly imagine something to be.    Are deaf people still allowed to use this gesture in sign language or are they all racists now?  This is how stupid it is to claim innocuous gestures or phrases are "racist".   

 

Maybe the self flagellating left wokies should reflect on how they have created this racial divisiveness in society today after decades of improving race relations and undoing all this progress.   I am pondering whether people on the left are as stupid as they appear to be or are exactly the thing they claim not to be and want to go back to a time where racism was commonplace.

Racist rant solicits self stroking grievance pouting from right wingers and you blame the left.

 

Nobody forced Scott Adams to open his mouth and spew racism, he wasn’t controlled by some imaginary lefty wokeism, he spewed racism because he’s a racist.

 

 

 

Edited March 1, 2023 by Chomper Higgot

[thaibeachlovers]

4 minutes ago, Lorenzo Valla said:

All speech is free, but some speech is more free than others.

Animal Farm should be required reading for all school children

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, Lorenzo Valla said:

This is the tip of the iceberg for the Comintern propagandists.  ANYTHING they disagree with, or can find fault with, is 'racist', 'offensive', 'triggering', 'threat to democracy', etc. and must be cancelled and stopped.

 

Remember, all speech is free...but some speech is more free.

Nevertheless the remarks made by Scott Adams were racist, he got some payback.

 

Speech is free, but not free of consequences.

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

I would hazard a guess they use the normal ok sign, did you miss the important context mentioned

Will schools be running compulsory courses for students to understand which "context" is racist, and which is not?

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, Lorenzo Valla said:

The 'context' being applied by the aggrieved and not the displayer, of course. 

 

'It's only ok, if I agree that it's ok.'

By the age of 18 most people have learned communication is a two way thing.

 

You say something, gesture something and others hear, read what you are communicating.

 

If you offend people, you might suffer consequences.

 

If you are smart, you don’t do it within arms reach.

 

If you are smarter you figure out avoiding the immediate consequences of offending people is not the only reason not to go around offending people.

 

Scott Adams is a racist.

 

I don’t feel the need to defend him or deflect from that observable truth.

[NickyLouie]

I knew Dilbert didn't play that woke liberal mindset, good on ya

 

Scott Adams is said be worth approx 75 million US , enjoy your retirement. 

[Bkk Brian]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Will schools be running compulsory courses for students to understand which "context" is racist, and which is not?

My last response was a guess, now your turn...............

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, NickyLouie said:

I knew Dilbert didn't play that woke liberal mindset, good on ya

 

Scott Adams is said be worth approx 75 million US , enjoy your retirement. 

The evidence is he’s eaten up with hatred.

 

No amount of money will fix that.

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Lorenzo Valla said:

If a right-wing nut uses a stereotype to support an argument, they're a racist.  If a savior/guardian uses it, no problem ????

 

Being Jewish refers to the religion you practice, not your race.

Tell that to the Nazis. Or white supremacists. Or go back a hundred and see what the consensus was then.

 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Lorenzo Valla said:

It's perfectly ok to criticize Mr. Dilbert's nonsense, but it's also ok to not really care what a middling comic says about anything.  It's just his OPINION.  It's sort of like learning what a nutjob Tom Cruise is...but somehow I still like his movies.

 

It's always a joy to read how much the savior/guardians value their own knowledge and how their judgments indicate a superiority in any and all conclusions.  Rasmussen would not be my go-to source for survey information or polls, but your cancellation of them because they're 'right-wing' is just another example of self-proclaimed intellectual superiority.  NO ONE is paying you a penny for your opinions about anything.  Rasmussen has a quite few people paying for theirs.  

 

It's a fascinating insight into your mind that you can correctly see Mao's/CCP's fanatical self-righteousness, but not your own.  Hence, the comparison.

Rational folks would expect a pollster not to take a political stance. Just because Rasmussen pays poeple to do its polling, that doesn't make it reliable. It could be that it's found a  profitable market niche and is acting accordingly. 

And it's telling that you consistently engage in name calling to characterize those who disagree with you. Not a trait that's indicative of rational thinking.

 

It's also telling that you offered response at all to examination of the falseness of your other claims.

 

Edited March 1, 2023 by placeholder

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Lorenzo Valla said:

Let me try to help you here, savior/guardian....it's possible for a bunch of nutjob extremists to consider a person to be both white AND sub-human.  Sorry the subject of history seems to have eluded your powerful intellect.  

It's possible, really? Here's the definition of sub-human:  So apparently you can  be not human but be white. Here's the definition of subhuman

 

of a lower order of being than the human.

https://www.google.com/search?q=sub+human&oq=sub+human&aqs=edge..69i57j0i512l4j0i10i512j0i512l2j69i64.1847j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

So, saying a sub-human can be white makes about as much sense as saying that a chimpanzee could be white or black or categorized racially in any way that lumped them with humans.

Edited March 1, 2023 by placeholder

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Lorenzo Valla said:

This is the tip of the iceberg for the Comintern propagandists.  ANYTHING they disagree with, or can find fault with, is 'racist', 'offensive', 'triggering', 'threat to democracy', etc. and must be cancelled and stopped.

 

Remember, all speech is free...but some speech is more free.

Comintern? Really? Are you a time traveler? Or Rip Van Winkle?

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Lorenzo Valla said:

All speech is free, but some speech is more free than others.

Freedom of speech in the USA means freedom from government interference. It doesn't mean freedom from consequences.

[CG1 Blue]

7 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Nobody forced Scott Adams to open his mouth and spew racism, he wasn’t controlled by some imaginary lefty wokeism, he spewed racism because he’s a racist.

Which parts of what he said were actually racist in the true definition of the word? And explain why you think racist is the correct definition. 

 

Some people over use the words racist and racism. 

[Lee65]

On 2/28/2023 at 2:55 PM, Jingthing said:

In the American racial context Obama is black.

Says you.  Many/most thinking people disagree.

 

Because there's no way of defining "Black".  Or "White".  Or "Person of Color".  There's not even a generally agreed upon definition - even among experts - for "Race".

 

Perhaps you mean Black is just short for "American of African heritage"?  Well, go back far enough and Americans are all that.  Americans are all Black.  (Good news: reparations for all.)  

 

A very dark-skinned Fijian-American I asked said he's not black.  But would he refuse a special government program for blacks?  No.  Would the government withhold special support for this dark-skinned fellow?  No.

 

The idiot Kamala Harris claims she's "black".  And while we're at it, are the Chinese "people of color"?  What about the half-Chinese, half-white?  Is it ok to say "yellow-skinned"?  Says who? 

 

Now there are machines that measure skin color.  Why not add these to the mix.  A Black-o-meter in every public space.  A People-of-Color device to sort out who gets what special status.  Swarthy Mediterraneans: keep working on that tan.  Albinos may be SOL.  

 

Again, race-baiting is a distraction for the feeble-minded.  This includes Scott Adams who couldn't identify "Black" or "White" any better than the rest of us. 

[Jingthing]

7 minutes ago, Lee65 said:

Says you.  Many/most thinking people disagree.

 

Because there's no way of defining "Black".  Or "White".  Or "Person of Color".  There's not even a generally agreed upon definition - even among experts - for "Race".

 

Perhaps you mean Black is just short for "American of African heritage"?  Well, go back far enough and Americans are all that.  Americans are all Black.  (Good news: reparations for all.)  

 

A very dark-skinned Fijian-American I asked said he's not black.  But would he refuse a special government program for blacks?  No.  Would the government withhold special support for this dark-skinned fellow?  No.

 

The idiot Kamala Harris claims she's "black".  And while we're at it, are the Chinese "people of color"?  What about the half-Chinese, half-white?  Is it ok to say "yellow-skinned"?  Says who? 

 

Now there are machines that measure skin color.  Why not add these to the mix.  A Black-o-meter in every public space.  A People-of-Color device to sort out who gets what special status.  Swarthy Mediterraneans: keep working on that tan.  Albinos may be SOL.  

 

Again, race-baiting is a distraction for the feeble-minded.  This includes Scott Adams who couldn't identify "Black" or "White" any better than the rest of us. 

I wasn't talking about skin color.

Racial classifications are SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS and they vary radically between different countries.

Again, and this is a FACT, in the American racial context, Obama is definitely BLACK.

Cheers

[Lee65]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

I wasn't talking about skin color.

Racial classifications are SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS and they vary radically between different countries.

Again, and this is a FACT, in the American racial context, Obama is definitely BLACK.

If it's not skin color then what is it?

 

Fact?  Who made you the final arbiter?  Please describe the criteria for being "Black"?  I'll add your opinions to the list.  

 

To many Americans, Obama's not Black.  Neither is Kamala Harris.  

 

Guess that's also a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT.  In the American racial context.    

 

 

 

 

Edited March 1, 2023 by Lee65

[ozimoron]

2 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

Which parts of what he said were actually racist in the true definition of the word? And explain why you think racist is the correct definition. 

 

Some people over use the words racist and racism. 

Racism is more intent than words. That's why Adams has been "cancelled". Intent is inferred from context.

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, Lee65 said:

If it's not skin color then what is it?

 

Fact?  Who made you the final arbiter?  Please describe the criteria for being "Black"?  I'll add your opinions to the list.  

 

To many Americans, Obama's not Black.  Neither is Kamala Harris.  

 

Guess that's also a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT.  In the American racial context.    

 

 

 

 

He considers himself black and the majority of American blacks consider him black. They do consider him different than American blacks without a family history of slavery in America though. If you don't understand what social construct means, there are ways to learn. 

[Jingthing]

Of course I meant with a family history not without.

The majority of American blacks have that family history.

[Hanaguma]

37 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Of course I meant with a family history not without.

The majority of American blacks have that family history.

You are referring to the ADOS community of black Americans I take it?  Funny how nobody has been able to answer how recent immigrants from Africa are somehow able to outstrip so-called 'native born' African American ADOS people.  Perhaps race isn't the issue.  

 

As for Adams, I am sure he is getting ready to jump to Substack if he hasn't already. 

[Credo]

13 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

You are referring to the ADOS community of black Americans I take it?  Funny how nobody has been able to answer how recent immigrants from Africa are somehow able to outstrip so-called 'native born' African American ADOS people.  Perhaps race isn't the issue.  

 

As for Adams, I am sure he is getting ready to jump to Substack if he hasn't already. 

A lot of the immigrant blacks haven't had a life-time of discrimination, oppression, lack of housing, lack of health care, etc., etc., etc.  

[ozimoron]

5 minutes ago, Credo said:

A lot of the immigrant blacks haven't had a life-time of discrimination, oppression, lack of housing, lack of health care, etc., etc., etc.  

And they got to the US on H1B visas no doubt

[Hanaguma]

2 minutes ago, Credo said:

A lot of the immigrant blacks haven't had a life-time of discrimination, oppression, lack of housing, lack of health care, etc., etc., etc.  

Seriously? Someone from Somalia or Nigeria or Ethiopia had it better than African Americans who grew up in the US?  

[Credo]

3 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Seriously? Someone from Somalia or Nigeria or Ethiopia had it better than African Americans who grew up in the US?  

You made an unsubstantiated claim.  Now you are making an assertion that the people from Somalia, Nigeria or Ethiopia are immigrants.  Most are not immigrants, they are refugees.  So, do you think refugees are a good for the US?  

But here's a little more about immigrants from Sub-Sahara Africa:

Compared to the total U.S. immigrant population, sub-Saharan Africans are better educated, participate in the labor force at higher rates, and are more likely to speak English at home. Yet they also have lower average incomes and experience poverty at higher rates than the foreign-born population overall.

 

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/sub-saharan-african-immigrants-united-states?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIjf6NnbC7_QIVxxPUAR3I_AD0EAAYASAAEgJqO_D_BwE