Well said.

Not to mention, the country has yet to shed its systemic racism, as observed by its racial demography in the census, or the so-called "diversity, equity, and inclusion" measures now in place. The Federal government is now using race as a consideration in hiring workers under the auspices of "racial justice".

I said discriminating against someone on account of their membership on in a false taxonomy is an inability to discriminate between individuals, not that individuals are unable to distinguish between individuals. Rather than let the individual inform their behaviors, they let the false taxonomy do so. — NOS4A2

We're all guilty of that to some degree, whether it be by race, sex, age, or whatever, though we can try to change our implicit biases.

I'm assuming people are motivated by their beliefs. — NOS4A2

A belief isn't necessarily motivating. People are influenced by their biases, if that's what you're trying to say.

If you believe in racial taxonomies it gives reason to discriminate against its members on racial grounds.

Again, merely believing in a 'false taxonomy' is not itself a motivator.

If you do not believe in racial taxonomies it does not give reason to discriminate on racial grounds.

Rather, claiming to not believe in racial taxonomies attempts (badly) to rationalize the status quo.

The Rasmusson Poll isn't a scam, but it isn't a highly rated polling organization either. — BC

:up:

A stupid poll by a crappy right-wing institution, whipping into a frenzy other right-wing goofs like Scott Adams.

I’m glad he’s been canceled. Not because of what he said— but because “Dilbert” has always sucked. Wish they did it years ago.

A belief isn't necessarily motivating. People are influenced by their biases, if that's what you're trying to say. — praxis

How do you parse out "belief" from "bias"? If I think that blacks are less intelligent than whites, is that a belief or a bias? (fact: I don't think that.). If I think that white trash make bad neighbors, is that a belief or a bias? (I kind of think so.).

How do you parse out what, exactly, is motivating?

Is the difference between being motivated by a belief or a bias a difference that matters?

We're all guilty of that to some degree, whether it be by race, sex, age, or whatever, though we can try to change our implicit biases.

Speak for yourself. I don’t see how that is possible when one doesn’t believe he can derive any valid information from such a vacuous concept. Better to learn from actual flesh-and-blood human beings before any judgement upon them can be made.

Rather, claiming to not believe in racial taxonomies attempts (badly) to rationalize the status quo.

How?

How do you parse out "belief" from "bias"? — BC

I was attempting to make a distinction between conscious beliefs and implicit biases, in an effort to make sense of NOS's claims.

If I think that white trash make bad neighbors, is that a belief or a bias? (I kind of think so.). — BC

Years ago I lived in a funky neighborhood for a while and once had what I would describe as white trash neighbors. They were very bad neighbors. I'm sure that that experience deepened whatever negative prejudice I might have for people like that. On the other hand, I can consciously appreciate that poor ignorant white folk could be sweet neighbors and that they're not all bad. For whatever reason, I might try to condition myself to have less of an implicit bias against white trash.

How do you parse out what, exactly, is motivating? — BC

Most broadly, by attraction and aversion. A bit less broadly, when competing for resources an advantage is desirable or attractive and a disadvantage is undesirable or aversive.

Is the difference between being motivated by a belief or a bias a difference that matters? — BC

Yes, because reason has the potential to change our biases. I think that I'm prejudiced against white trash neighbors, for example, and I can take action to change that bias.

Adams saying he was going to live with other white people is hardly a remarkable stance. — BC

Characterising it like this is misleading (and just what he's doing on Twitter now btw as he comically tries to save his dead career) because he didn't just neutrally say he was going to live with other white people but ranted publically that white people should "get away" from black people. The mode of presentation counts here.

Granted, individual racist meltdowns like this in isolation are not the most damaging aspect of racism and the executives who are cancelling him may have similar (but hidden) views and their response may be "easy", but none of that amounts to an argument that their decision not to run his comic is a bad one. It's likely a good economic decision on their part (racism is bad for business), and what else is there to consider? Unless you think they have some moral obligation to support the guy?

No one banned Dilbert. Adams can go self-publish if he wants. All that happened was he made himself toxic. His decision, his responsibility.

Better to learn from actual flesh-and-blood human beings before any judgement upon them can be made. — NOS4A2

Yeah, that's not how the human mind works though. We automatically make assessments about people and things. That doesn't mean that we can't put aside whatever biases we may have, given the inclination and opportunity.

Rather, claiming to not believe in racial taxonomies attempts (badly) to rationalize the status quo.
– praxis

How? — NOS4A2

I think the motivation for claiming that a problem doesn't exist is to resist change, basically.

I don't much care, either. I don't own any stock in Adams or Dilbert. — BC

The OP was primarily shocked at rightist responses to the incident. It's in the OP.

Is the idea that people are more racist than you thought? Is there anything else to it than that? What are we supposed to be debating here? — Baden

I was curious if anyone here would defend Scott Adams.

If only 53% of white people polled believe it is ok to be black, would a black man be justified in saying that blacks people should stay away from whites? Or would we cancel him?

Racist polls invariably lead to racist reactions. — NOS4A2

I don't think it works both ways. There are huge numbers of blacks still alive who remember when there was legal racism used against them. I can understand how that older group would have a negative opinion of their oppressors (Southern whites). I would be shocked if they didn't.

I think that I'm prejudiced against white trash neighbors, for example, and I can take action to change that bias. — praxis

In the real world, some people are trashy. Just personally, I don't think anybody is under any obligation to think, believe, or feel positively about them. In the real world, some problems are imposed upon people and some problems are brought on by the people themselves. One can distinguish between the two.

If you live next door to a house where irresponsible, disruptive, and highly annoying people live, why should you not have a negative bias against them?

On the other hand, if the people next door are responsible, cooperative, and polite but you are biased against them because they are lesbians, Hispanics, convicted felons, Asians, Moslems, Blacks, Jehovah's Witnesses, or MAGA Republicans -- whatever they are -- then you should certainly adjust your outrageous sexual, ethnic, convict, religious and political prejudices and hatreds.

On the other hand, if the people next door are responsible, cooperative, and polite but you are biased against them because they are lesbians, Hispanics, convicted felons, Asians, Moslems, Blacks, Jehovah's Witnesses, or MAGA Republicans -- whatever they are -- then you should probably adjust your outrageous sexual, ethnic, convict, religious and political prejudices. — BC

Nothing wrong with political prejudices. I assume you're prejudiced against Stalinists? Fascists? Neonazi's? MAGA Republicans believe in some pretty sketchy stuff and I have found them all to be small-minded and cruel.

@NOS4A2 It doesn't work both ways because the underclass doesn't have many options. The overclass has all the goodies.

It doesn't work both ways because the underclass doesn't have many options. The overclass has all the goodies. — BC

Yeah, clearly there's tension in the relationship between blacks and whites. As members of the ruling majority (and historical oppressers of blacks), it's incumbent on whites to fix the relationship. Whites have the goodies in this society.

Rather, claiming to not believe in racial taxonomies attempts (badly) to rationalize the status quo. — praxis

:up:

:clap: :100:

Yep, "white flight" is as baseball & apple pie as "In God We Trust" on Caesar's filthy lucre – old-time "heartland" stuff. I suspect Scott Adams would, for whatever reason, rather be "canceled" abruptly by mashing PC-zeitgeist buttons than just "fuck this job!" quit. Whatever. Never a "Dilbert" reader, like you, BC, I won't miss him, though I did enjoy (and still have a copy of) his first pandeism novel God's Debris.

As members of the ruling majority (and historical oppressers of blacks), it's incumbent on whites to fix the relationship. Whites have [almost all] the goodies in this society. — RogueAI

As long as scapegoating nonwhite communities is less costly psychically and economically for white commmunities than "fixing the relationship" in America, except – often temporarily – tweaked at the margins, the racism-tolerant status quo will prevail.

In the real world, some people are trashy. Just personally, I don't think anybody is under any obligation to think, believe, or feel positively about them. In the real world, some problems are imposed upon people and some problems are brought on by the people themselves. — BC

I'm not currently in any particular position to treat white trash unfairly. I don't live near or interact with any, plus I'm not an employer, landlord, civic authority, or hold any real position of power. If I were then I'd be concerned about my bias and treating individuals who appear to be of that subculture fairly.

I think the motivation for claiming that a problem doesn't exist is to resist change, basically.

Employing and furthering the problem doesn’t only resist change, though, it compounds it. The only way to banish it is to quit using it.

I don't think it works both ways. There are huge numbers of blacks still alive who remember when there was legal racism used against them. I can understand how that older group would have a negative opinion of their oppressors (Southern whites). I would be shocked if they didn't.

It works myriad of ways to those who are just. The use of these categories are unjust, and for the same reason it was unjust to use them in the past. Justice doesn’t demand that a man ought to forgive those who wronged him, but he ought not condemn with the same crime those who did not.

Employing and furthering the problem doesn’t only resist change, though, it compounds it. The only way to banish it is to quit using it. — NOS4A2

Merely acknowledging race or "false taxonomies" is not the problem so if it were possible to be "color-blind" it would not solve the problem. Intentionally employing and furthering biases is done in order to manipulate the ignorant (racists who may lose more than they gain) and take or maintain the advantage over the disadvantaged.

The way to banish it is to realize what's going on and stop being manipulated, or stop being an asshole if you're one of the manipulators or one of the manipulator's bootlickers.

The only way to banish it is to quit using it. — NOS4A2

Like Covid-19, "just stop testing" to get rid of it. :mask:

Nothing wrong with political prejudices. I assume you're prejudiced against Stalinists? Fascists? Neonazi's? MAGA Republicans believe in some pretty sketchy stuff and I have found them all to be small-minded and cruel. — RogueAI

Stalinists? Check.
Fascists? Check.
Neonazis? Check.
MAGA Republicans? Check.
Neoconservatives? Check.
Neoliberals? Check.
Mafiosos? Check.
Drug cartels? Check.
Capitalists? Check.
Run of the mill crooks? Check.
Drug dealers? Check.
Drug users? Check.
Chronic Alcoholics? Check.
Southern Baptists? Check.
Book Banners? Check.
Illegal immigrants? Check.
Woke Activists? Double Check.
and more!

I am a prejudiced. I am biased, implicitly and explicitly. I love, I hate, I am coldly indifferent. I'm normal.

The 'concept' that there are people who hold no prejudices, who are free of bias, employ no stereotypes in their thinking, and approach every individual and group with an open mind is an absurd falsehood. Neither human societies nor human brains work that way.

I am not a terrible person, nor am I a bigot. What I am is cognizant that I am biased, prejudices, and I do not translate my biases into action. It is better to admit one's biases than deny them and regularly let them loose.

I don't fault Scott Adams for being biased and prejudiced. My assumption is that everyone -- even Baden -- is biased, prejudiced. I fault him for deciding to let his biases loose. (There was nothing spontaneous about his vlog entry.). People in a civil society are not obligated to be bias-free. They are obligated to maintain the membrane between their thoughts and their actions.

It works myriad of ways to those who are just. The use of these categories are unjust, and for the same reason it was unjust to use them in the past. Justice doesn’t demand that a man ought to forgive those who wronged him, but he ought not condemn with the same crime those who did not. — NOS4A2

It's not up to black people to stop systemic racism against black people.

I don't fault Scott Adams for being biased and prejudiced. My assumption is that everyone -- even Baden -- is biased, prejudiced. I fault him for deciding to let his biases loose. (There was nothing spontaneous about his vlog entry.). People in a civil society are not obligated to be bias-free. They are obligated to maintain the membrane between their thoughts and their actions. — BC

Well said!

I remember watching an interview with Scott Adams around when he first publicly came out as a Trump fanboy. He was one of the ones who praised Trump as a genius, an expert communicator (I think he meant an expert manipulator). When acknowledging Trump's lies he basically said that the ends justify the means. Did they? Trump didn't accomplish anything that any other Republican candidate couldn't have, like lower taxes and reduce regulations for our corporate overlords, slashing entitlements, etc. He failed miserably at some of his most notable promises. If he was such a genius manipulator why wasn't he more successful? and why does he continue to lose so badly?

The truth is that people like Trump are simply unbound by things like principles and honor and are therefore capable of doing things that, thank God, relatively few people are willing to do. It seems that Scott Adams must be like Trump in this way, otherwise he couldn't admire him as he does.

My assumption is that everyone -- even Baden -- is biased, prejudiced. I fault him for deciding to let his biases loose. (There was nothing spontaneous about his vlog entry.) — BC

:up:

Merely acknowledging race or "false taxonomies" is not the problem so if it were possible to be "color-blind" it would not solve the problem. Intentionally employing and furthering biases is done in order to manipulate the ignorant (racists who may lose more than they gain) and take or maintain the advantage over the disadvantaged.

The way to banish it is to realize what's going on and stop being manipulated, or stop being an asshole if you're one of the manipulators or one of the manipulator's bootlickers.

I said believing in it is the problem. Adopting it for good intentions or for whatever other reason doesn’t absolve one of it. It’s still false, unjust, pernicious. Saying it is implicit is simply an admission of guilt.

I said believing in it is the problem. — NOS4A2

That's neither here nor there. Wounds heal on their own schedule. You can't force it by outlawing certain word combinations.

Adopting it for good intentions or for whatever other reason doesn’t absolve one of it. — NOS4A2

It’s not a sin to distinguish people by race. Is this a religious thing for you?

Saying it is implicit is simply an admission of guilt. — NOS4A2

Realizing our implicit biases is self-awareness.

That's neither here nor there. Wounds heal on their own schedule. You can't force it by outlawing certain word combinations.

Outlawing certain word combinations… is that how you personally stop believing in something?

It’s not a sin to distinguish people by race. Is this a religious thing for you?

Did someone say it was a sin? I said it was false, unjust, and pernicious.

Realizing our implicit biases is self-awareness.

Are you implicitly racist?