Dear Mr. Adams,
I'm a slightly dorky male software engineer in my late forties, so obviously I used to follow Dilbert. Not only did I speckle my conversation with references to various Dilbert strips, I also bought many Dilbert books as well (you're welcome). You will find several of your books acting as mediums for mold colonies in my garage at this very moment.
Dilbert was a dorky engineer who may have been a loser in many ways, but was heroic in that he stood for truth. Like me! As a kid, I couldn't figure out how to avoid getting beat up, play sports or to talk to girls, but I came up at the birth of the PC era and knew I was going to be a software engineer from an early age. Your code compiled or it didn't. This all made a lot more sense to me than what made a pair of sneakers cool or not.
In the corporate cesspool of lies and puffery, Dilbert and his fellow engineers were the voice of reason. Of sanity. Of truth, even when inconvenient ("all of our friendly beta testers were killed by Project Dewdrop").
Given all that, it was a shock to me to discover that you, Scott Adams, apparently always considered the pointy-haired boss to be the true protagonist. That's the only conclusion that I can draw from your support of Trump, because to me he is the ultimate pointy-haired boss - vain, self-important, stupid and completely hostile to the the truth. When Trump claims that the murder rate is at a 47 year high (to support his lock 'em all up position), or that three to five million people voted illegally against him (to support his voter suppression initiative), this is squarely pointy-haired boss territory.
There's a lot more I can say about Trump as the pointy haired boss, and about the rise of the narcissistic psychopathic bully, but this blog post isn't about him. It's about you.
You attempted to address fears about Trump by saying this: "If Trump gets elected, and he does anything that looks even slightly Hitler-ish in office, I will join the resistance movement and help kill him."
To which my reaction was "ha fucking ha." It was an insult to people like me with genuine fears about a rising demagogue who couldn't quite distance himself from the KKK, who called Mexicans rapists (apart from the some, he assumed, who were good people) and who wanted a Muslim ban on people entering this country (excepting, as it turned out, from countries he did business in). We shouldn't be afraid, because you, a cartoonist who hasn't learned the basics of shading, were promising to throw yourself into the resistance movement.
Let's say that Trump is a totalitarian maniac. How exactly are you going to "help kill him"?
I'm reminded of one of your books, entitled "Shave the Whales". It was the premise of one of your strips, in which Dilbert ponders that "whales are mammals, mammals have hair - shave the whales." Honestly, this was one of your least funny strips in my opinion, but that's not why I bring it up. I bring it up because it gives me some insight into how your mind works.
First, you think it's funny to poke fun at people with genuine concerns - say, about the extinction of the whales. To me, this is a poor topic for comedy, given that we are in fact in the middle of the Sixth Extinction and whales are still fairly threatened despite conservation efforts (that were brought about by the people you mocked).
But it also seems to show your love for word play above all. And this brings me to your recent post, in which you wrote "I've decided to side with the Jewish gay immigrant who has an African-American boyfriend" over the protestors.
Oh, the irony of those Berkeley protestors trying to keep the Jewish gay immigrant with the African-American boyfriend from speaking! What is wrong with Berkeley and liberals?
Yeah, sure. If we want to be incredibly superficial and sophomoric about it, it does look bad for Berkeley. That guy being protested against sure looks like an oppressed minority. But let's go just a little bit deeper, shall we? Out of respect for the University of Berkeley, which is supposed to be respected institute of learning after all.
- This Jewish gay immigrant with the African-American boyfriend (who I will call "M") once said "I don’t like Planned Parenthood. They kill all those black babies. In 20 years, they could be my harem."
- "M" has praised Richard Spencer, who at best is a white nationalist, and who once published an article advocating for the genocide of black people.
- "M" apparently rallied and directed hundreds of anonymous Twitter commenters to hurl racist and sexist remarks at Leslie Jones, I suppose for being black but not having a penis.
- "M" employs online strategies that can best be described as cyber-bulling. For example, he says that "if someone calls you an anti-Semite, you go to their page and put up swastikas"
- "M" claims that "We live in a post-fact era. It’s wonderful." I'm sorry, should Berkeley be promoting a "post-fact era"? Isn't that exactly the opposite of what they should be doing?
About black people. Yeah, he apparently likes black dick, but he certainly doesn't seem to respect black people as human beings. He's all very jokey about it. Is he serious about the swastikas, or is it a joke?
Frankly, I don't give a damn. White Nationalism is in fact on the rise, and it is being abetted by Donald Trump and Steve Bannon. This from Reuters.
The program, "Countering Violent Extremism," or CVE, would be changed to "Countering Islamic Extremism" or "Countering Radical Islamic Extremism," the sources said, and would no longer target groups such as white supremacists who have also carried out bombings and shootings in the United States"The "hah hah, you took my swastikas seriously" bit isn't funny and it isn't okay. You cannot burn a cross on a someone's lawn ironically. Do you understand that? And if you declare that you are siding with a proponent of racist, sexist, antisemitic attacks because he's a "Jewish gay immigrant who has an African-American boyfriend", you are letting words and labels cloud your judgment. People are afraid of this shit, and their fears are rational.
You talk about the American system of checks and balances as to why Trump could never be Hitler. Those checks and balances didn't stop the Japanese internment camps, did they? Those exact same camps are currently being cited as precedent for what Trump/Bannon want to do to Muslims. And you know, Trump has (by the hand of Barack Obama, and possibly the worst thing he did) the power to detain people indefinitely without trial under the NDAA. It seems completely unconstitutional to me, but it is law and I don't trust that Trump won't abuse it. You're a rich white man, so yeah, the system will protect you. It's designed to. But don't tell other people they have the same protections, because they do not.
Stop telling people they are hysterical. We're not. You're just being incredibly superficial, overly literal and dismissive to people with more insight into the situation than you seem to have.
No, I don't support you getting beaten up. But stop defending Nazis already.
Good luck getting your head out of your ass,
a former fan
Scott,
ReplyDeleteWow. Just great.
The only thing I might add is to say that Trump's, "grab them by the pussy" comment was not a joke or something he might do. He said he had done it. It was a confession to committing serial sexual assault. Trump belongs on the sexual predator list, not the Oval Office, and yet Adams still doesn't think that is at all evil.
This was intelligent, well-written and I agree. And it's disappointing to have appreciated someone's work for years, only to find out that when you pull back the layers, it's nasty and smelly in its ignorance and meanness. I think it's going to take a lot to fix the rectal-cranial inversion there.
ReplyDelete