Dilbert cartoon cancelled by papers over creator’s racist video

I'm sure our local leftist rag will ride this bandwagon. It's sad... Dilbert is one of the few comic strips I find worth reading.
 
Yep! This PC crap is really getting out of hand. People need to go back to the 70s where people were allowed to have their opinions.
 
AverageJoe said:
Yep! This PC crap is really getting out of hand. People need to go back to the 70s where people were allowed to have their opinions.
Click to expand...

I pretty much agree, but where this story gets a little tricky and requires a little more digging, is that the Dilbert fella was citing a source for that poll he quoted that has been shown to have actual entanglements with white supremacy and potentially questionable polling methods. So in effect, what "Dilbert" is saying is true, that the poll results ( "It's okay to be white"), if accurate in showing non-white's opinions are a form of racism. Where "Dilbert" missed the boat is his reactionary statements about not continuing having helpful relationships with African-Americans. Which effectively means (to me) two wrongs don't make a right.
 
That I agree with. For me to cut off any relationships with African-Americans would mean that I would have to cut myself off from many in my own family. My family is far too diverse to even try this, nor would I anyhow. Many of our friends are AA as well.
 
He got into hot water not too long ago due to some of the comics taking digs at diversity training or something like (can't remember the details - I'm old lol). I'm sure the left has been waiting to find something else to get him cancelled. I agree, though, that he went too far in his comments about not having anything to do with african-americans anymore. That would certainly ensure that things will never get better.
 
voicecrying said:
He got into hot water not too long ago due to some of the comics taking digs at diversity training or something like (can't remember the details - I'm old lol). I'm sure the left has been waiting to find something else to get him cancelled. I agree, though, that he went too far in his comments about not having anything to do with african-americans anymore. That would certainly ensure that things will never get better.
Click to expand...
I did not dig deep into this kerfuffle, and I did not know that about his previous run-in with diversity people, but that helps clear up why the vicious MSM attack took place.
 
voicecrying said:
I agree, though, that he went too far in his comments about not having anything to do with african-americans anymore.
Click to expand...
This is essentially what BLM is in reverse. Those who dared to say the mantra should be “All Lives Matter” were summarily excoriated—regardless of their race/ethnicity.
 
What Adams said was definitely insensitive. I don't think he thought through the implications of calling a major racial demographic a "hate group."

That said, I'm reluctant to jump on the racism bandwagon. However misguided or misused it may or may not have been, he used data to draw a conclusion, which is pretty much the opposite of prejudice. And frankly, if I found out that something like half of group X didn't like my kind, I'd probably want to keep my distance too. For X, substitute blacks, Zoroastrians, little old ladies, the Elks club, whatever.
 
Ransom said:
What Adams said was definitely insensitive. I don't think he thought through the implications of calling a major racial demographic a "hate group."

That said, I'm reluctant to jump on the racism bandwagon. However misguided or misused it may or may not have been, he used data to draw a conclusion, which is pretty much the opposite of prejudice. And frankly, if I found out that something like half of group X didn't like my kind, I'd probably want to keep my distance too. For X, substitute blacks, Zoroastrians, little old ladies, the Elks club, whatever.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but again, I haven't vetted the claim of the MSM that the source he cited is significantly biased, so I don't know how legitimately the poll respondent's answers accurately represent the African-American opinion towards whiteness. But if the variability and bias of the pollsters is anywhere near accurate then Dilbert should have done his homework and based on that alone I think he should have been hesitant to use that source/poll make the case against reverse-racism. It just muddies the discussion and causes me to doubt his arguments, especially when he doubled down afterwards by insisting he identified as black.
 
ALAYMAN said:
Agreed, but again, I haven't vetted the claim of the MSM that the source he cited is significantly biased, so I don't know how legitimately the poll respondent's answers accurately represent the African-American opinion towards whiteness.
Click to expand...
If the poll is biased or misleading, then we can give Adams the benefit of the doubt for making an arguably rational response to bad data. In which case, the rational and responsible thing to do would be to admit the error and apologize.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top