*Dilbert has died

[samhexum]

Scott Adams, Creator of the ‘Dilbert’ Comic Strip, Dies at 68

APPLE.NEWS

---

Running in newspapers from 1989 to 2023, it sprang from the office monotony of his job as an applications engineer at Pacific Bell.

 

[Pd1_jap]

Dilbert comic strip dropped by US media over creator's racist tirade

WWW.BBC.COM

---

The comic strip's creator Scott Adams said white people should "get the hell away" from black people.

Not so sad he's dead. 

 

[BSR]

On 1/14/2026 at 3:29 AM, Pd1_jap said:

Not so sad he's dead. 

In response to a poll that asked “Is it OK to be white?”, a shocking percentage of blacks said no.  If you believe it is not OK to be white, then you hate whites.  Scott Adam’s mistake was neglecting to qualify his statement, stay away from blacks who hate whites, just as blacks should stay away from whites who hate blacks.  It’s 2026, not 1956.  In this day & age, if you hate someone just because of their skin color, then I’m staying the hell away from you.  God bless Scott Adams … R.I.P.

[Cooper]

Administrator’s Reminder 

Gentlemen, Just a quick reminder: No Politics. And, No Personal attacks. 

Messages will be deleted if you violate these Guidelines. 🙏

[Pd1_jap]

8 hours ago, BSR said:

In response to a poll that asked “Is it OK to be white?”, a shocking percentage of blacks said no.  If you believe it is not OK to be white, then you hate whites.  Scott Adam’s mistake was neglecting to qualify his statement, stay away from blacks who hate whites, just as blacks should stay away from whites who hate blacks.  It’s 2026, not 1956.  In this day & age, if you hate someone just because of their skin color, then I’m staying the hell away from you.  God bless Scott Adams … R.I.P.

 

I’m going to push back on this, because it’s trying to “both-sides” something that isn’t symmetrical.

Scott Adams didn’t just say “avoid people who hate you.” He told white people as a group to “get the hell away” from black people as a group. That’s collective blame. It treats millions of individuals—most of whom have done nothing wrong—as a single hostile category. That’s the definition of racist reasoning.

Also, a poll (even if it’s real, correctly sampled, and accurately interpreted) doesn’t justify condemning an entire race. If some percentage of any group answers something ugly to a vague question, the sane response is: “That’s concerning—let’s address the attitudes,” not “therefore avoid all of them.”

If you want a consistent standard, it’s simple:

Judge people as individuals.

Don’t attribute the worst opinions you can find to an entire race.

Don’t excuse sweeping racial statements by rebranding them as “self-protection.”

“It’s 2026, not 1956” cuts both ways. We should be past race-based generalizations—not dressing them up as common sense.

[+ JamesB]

In my opinion, Scott Adams was not assigning moral guilt to every black individual. He was reacting to a reported polling result. Group level data is routinely used to inform behavior. People adjust where they live, travel, or work based on crime statistics, political hostility, or social trust, even though those statistics never describe every individual. Saying that is always illegitimate when race is involved creates a special exemption that does not exist anywhere else. It is inconsistent to say patterns can be discussed until the moment they become uncomfortable.

“Judge individuals” is a good moral principle but it is not how humans navigate the world at scale. We constantly rely on generalizations to manage uncertainty. Calling that racism in every case collapses an important distinction between prejudice and pragmatic caution, even when the caution is poorly worded.

The claim is not that all racial generalizations are equally bad, but that responding to open expressions of hostility by advising distance is not the same thing as advocating dominance or exclusion. You can say the advice was crude or counterproductive without pretending it is equivalent to historical racism.

If it is 2026, we should be able to talk honestly about data, incentives, and social breakdowns without declaring that any uncomfortable inference is automatically bigotry.

[Pd1_jap]

The issue is that "race" is an incredibly broad, noisy category and a terrible proxy for individual hostility. Using a poll to recommend avoiding an entire race is the definition of stereotyping- treating individuals differently based on group averages.

You can talk about social breakdowns without turning identity into a risk marker. If someone is hostile, avoid that person; ifa specific place is unsafe, avoid that place. But "avoid black people" İsn't "pragmatic caution"-it's discriminatory.

[TonyDown]

Anyone remember when Dilbert had a big windfall and decided to spend it on a super computer?

I remember the sales guy character in that strip.  😆. 

 

The Elbonia strips were clever.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 16 by TonyDown

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

[BSR]

On 1/17/2026 at 3:30 AM, Pd1_jap said:

The issue is that "race" is an incredibly broad, noisy category and a terrible proxy for individual hostility. Using a poll to recommend avoiding an entire race is the definition of stereotyping- treating individuals differently based on group averages.

You can talk about social breakdowns without turning identity into a risk marker. If someone is hostile, avoid that person; ifa specific place is unsafe, avoid that place. But "avoid black people" İsn't "pragmatic caution"-it's discriminatory.

That’s what I said in my last post, that Adams’ mistake was failing to qualify his statement.  He said whites should avoid blacks, which is inflammatory.  I believe whites should avoid blacks who hate whites, which if you look at the poll of blacks who disagree with or aren’t sure about the statement “it’s OK to be white,” is a shockingly high percentage.

Many, far too many, blacks are told every single day from the day they are born that they are the victim of racism.  So every slight, every rudeness, every rejection, every “no” they experience in their lives — they perceive as racism whether it is or not, which in turn causes the shockingly high percentage of blacks who hate whites.  Since you will never undo a whole lifetime of inculcation, you simply have to avoid racist blacks.

Adams knew his statement was inflammatory because he predicted he would be canceled and lose his income.  Given that, I’m puzzled that he went ahead and said what he said, the way he said it.  I get where he was coming from, that anti-white racism is rampant in America and what’s even worse is that it is accepted.  If Adams’ intention was to shock and thereby get attention, he succeeded.