Um, what does he think Antifa means? You notice how they almost exclusively use the abbreviation and hardly ever the full name? For those who might actually be unaware, it means Anti-Fascist.
Scott Adams is a fucking moron. He apparently thinks anti-fascists are actually pro-fascist. Dumbass.
He’s probably one of those people who think the nazis were socialists because nazi is short for “national socialist”.
Probably, despite the fact that Hitler himself said they weren’t socialists.
The socialists of the party were killed in Night of the Long Knives
I mean but c’mon are we going to believe a word he said? /S
While I agree with both of you, these two points kinda contradict each other.
Just like North Korea is called DPRK: Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The fascist use whatever words are in fashion to name themselves.
Many do think antifa is just a different word for socialist, so it’s not necessarily a contradiction.
It is a contradiction, though.
“Antifa are ANTI fascist - it’s in the name!!”
“The Nazis weren’t socialist - you could name yourself whatever you want!!”
Or who conveniently forget about the Southern Strategy and the great party switch. Massive, massive mental gymnastics to put themselves on the ‘right’ side of history every time
I thought it was “I did Nazi that coming”
/S
A lot of conservatives have problems understanding words, especially words that apply to political beliefs. It’s party ignorance and partly a result of years of indoctrination. One example, thinking that anyone who isn’t hard-right is a ‘socialist’ or a ‘commie’ and not understanding that those aren’t the same thing. Then, fascist… many people seem to think fascist means an authoritarian government, independent of any other qualities or beliefs.
Fascism : a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government.
I mean, that’s what most people imagine, when they think fascist and I think it’s good enough.
Is every fascist government identical? No. But as near as makes no difference they are all the same type of asshole.
The rest of your points stand, however. People do not understand communism, socialism, nor Marxism.
You actually just proved their point by defining authoritarianism and calling it fascism. Fascist governments are authoritarian but that’s just one aspect of it.
I literally just pulled the first result on google…
And like I said for general conversations this definition is absolutely adequate.
It’s like talking about American Democracy and someone goes “well, technically we’re a Republic!”… Ok great…
The difference between fascism and communism is that people have generally a good idea of what a fascist government looks like, while they really don’t understand the other terms.
I disagree that people generally have a good idea what a fascist government looks like, or else there wouldn’t be this level of confusion. I think most people at best, know what countrys had a problem with fascism in the past, without any certainty of what parts of of those governments were where the fascism was, just guesses.
Thats why comparisons to nazis and such are so common I would say. People find it a lot easier to point out similarities to known fascism than to try and concisely point out the exact point where an action became “fascist”
I literally just pulled the first result on google…
Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.
It’s not good enough because fascism is specifically a form of right wing authoritarianism which includes hyper-capitalism, close relationship between the state and corporations, sexism, racism, and xenophobia. Otherwise we’re back to the idea that a fascist dictatorship and a communist dictatorship are the same thing, which clearly they’re not.
I think it’s good enough.
Most of the time, yeah. We take these mental shortcuts to avoid a lot of unnecessary headache and talking.
Problem is, these shortcuts get hijacked by asshole grifters to push their own agenda in todays climate of tiktok and youtube shorts. And this is especially potent when the usual everyday use of the word is not good enough. Want another example: “What is a woman?” Same mental shortcut. Same method to exploit the shortcut. Same bullshit. Nuanced discussion not happening.
Sometimes, we just need to be precise in discourse. These people are intentionally not being precise. They hijack our mental shortcuts.
Another example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4F6GVLBVcQ
But yeah, in everyday use it’s good enough. Of course it is.
Yeah but get into a debate with Scott Adams and like-minded morons and inevitably they’ll try and pretend that Nazis were actually socialists because it was in their name. Never mind that was a throwback to some early party mergers and everything they said and did was ultra right nationalism. Strictly not fascism (that is the Italian variant) but aligned to it so closely that it broadly makes no odds.
Moreover, anti-fascist action: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifaschistische_Aktion
It’s not enough to just have an oppositional stance or something, it’s the action that makes antifa.
I though Antifa were just radical cola purists.
Anti-fizz
That’s a step too far!
I’ve heard more than one person on Fox News or other Right Wing stations call them Fascist Antifa.
The Dilbert guy really went off the deep end, didn’t he?
He went far enough, that there’s a Behind the Bastards episode about him.
- 20230711 - Part One: How The Dilbert Guy Lost His Mind - 1h32m
- 20230713 - Part Two: How The Dilbert Guy Lost His Mind - 1h46m
Is there really 2 hours and 18 minutes worth of content devoted to Scott Adams losing his goddamn mind? I don’t know if I have that kind of time to invest in that douche canoe.
I really enjoyed it. But I was also playing rocket league or driving when I listened to it. Behind the bastards is moderately funny so it’s an easy listen.
Really good episodes too
Wait, I thought that was just a random idiot, are you telling me that’s the author of Dilbert?
Yep, he’s completely lost it and was dropped by pretty much every newspaper after describing black people as a “hate group” (among other crazy stuff).
I really don’t understand successful people attaching their wagon to Conservatives… The entire human history is just a parade of religious Conservatives resisting change, trying to subjugate others and looking like absolute assholes in hindsight.
There is ZERO examples in history of “hey we were going to expand freedoms, but good thing we didn’t, thanks to the religious opposition!”…
Conservatives are wrong and have been wrong on every single social issue since the dawn of time.
I’m sure they had their victories when it comes to economic issues, but they haven’t had one of those in over half a century either, since the only idea they seem to have is tax cuts.
Actually, economically, conservatives have mostly failed as well.
Hah yeah… It also wasn’t until this post that I made that connection. For the past few years I’ve heard of “the Dilbert Guy going off the deep end” and seen random posts (like this) with this Scott character being an absolute moron
mind blown meme
He certainly did
Along with Chachi, Hercules, and the Wheel of Fortune guy. Conservatism (read: Fox News) will rot your fucking brain.
What’s this about Wheel of Fortune?
It’s almost as if Fox News rots your brain! Or maybe boomers just licked a lot of lead paint as kids…
Every word uttered by a conservative is either a lie or profoundly incorrect. Every communication is an attempt to manipulate. This is who conservatives are.
Never trust the word of a conservative. Never.
I was about to advise you to chill a bit, then saw your username and now am sort of impressed by such staunch commitment to being pissed off.
I used to read ToiletPaperUSA on reedit and yeah, fuckin Charlie Kirk. EVERYTHING he posts online contains fallacies and conflations attempting to manipulate people, like he knows his ideas can’t stand on their own without dishonesty.
I’ve been putting off seeing family for so long, but I’ve been begged to come to the reunion this year as my Grandma is not doing so great. Every single one of them were once proud Trump supporters who grew silent after j6. Now all they do is scream about Phil Murphy and…bears? Windmills causing whales to beach? This weekend is going to be dreadful.
Why do they all hate windmills so much?
I had an old family friend meltdown, unfriend me from facebook, and avoid me like the plague ever since I told him he was wrong when he claimed it takes more electricity to make a single windmill than a windmill can ever produce in it’s usuable lifetime…
Pure culture wars. Renewable energy is an amazing boon for decentralization, which means rural communities and those who want to go off-grid. It’s a no brainer. But because they’ve tied themselves to social conservatism and their thought leaders in that sphere have major financial ties to gas & oil, they have to morally oppose windmills.
Actually that is really really interesting what you said, “morally opposed to windmills.” They obviously are against them from a “moral” perspective, but I’ve never seen even an attempt at a moral argument against windmills, its all crazy conspiracy theory stuff. I would almost respect it more if one of them just said something like “I don’t like windmills because I think it is morally wrong to harvest wind”.
Meanwhile, drive through Kansas sometime…thousands of windmills along I-70, sometimes stretching as far as the eye can see. Maybe 10s of thousands. The discrepancy between that fact and the opposition is astounding. Look what states have the most power generation by windmills.
Every word uttered by a conservative is either a lie or profoundly incorrect
Or projection, so much projection.
That’s not correct; you’re taking a black and white, absolutist view to the question, and that just doesn’t work.
For instance, take economics; many traditional conservative positions square pretty well with economic theories and practices. Social conservatism also has a place, given the tension that exists between concepts of community and society. I do not agree with many conservative interpretations, but it’s not accurate to say that all conservatives are intellectually dishonest.
OTOH, modern “conservatives” aren’t conservatives in any meaningful way. It’s now more like regressive populism.
take economics; many traditional conservative positions square pretty well with economic theories and practices
Like trickle down theory, corporate personhood, that tax breaks will result in tax revenue, and that government austerity is preferable to stimulus to move an economy from recession to expansion? They’re zero for four in the most popular 20th century conservative economic theories. I’m not sure that economics is the best lens to view conservative theory in a positive light.
Dude. What you consider “the left” IS CONSERVATIVISM. The USA is soooooo far afield, people are sooooo brainwashed, they can’t hold a liberal thought in their heads if they fucking tried.
US liberals are more centrists in a European sense, no argument there. I’m just pointing out that offering up US conservative economic theory as a shining star of success is not the boast they think it is.
neoliberalism is conservative ideology and it has been doing very well the last 40 years, to our vast detriment
No, Reaganomics was a bad-faith move by social regressives. Corporate personhood has been a reality since Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. in 1886, so I guess that’s conservative, but also not exactly. The idea of laissez-faire economics–that the market will mostly sort itself out with minimal gov’t intervention–is generally upheld by prevailing economic theories, and is a fundamentally conservative view. I happen to disagree with the economists though, because they’re only looking at it as an economic issue, rather than economics being a manifestation of the social realities.
“conservative” is starting to feel like a meaningless label that assholes throughout history have tried to use to describe themselves because they didn’t like the other words people were using to describe them.
And don’t get me wrong, I’m sure there are “real” conservatives out there and in history, but it sure feels like they are outnumbered by the people that use the word as a mask, and that is weird.
Conservatism took a weird turn with Reagan. Reagan was socially regressive, and not an orthodox fiscal conservative. George HW Bush (Dubya’s dad) was in many ways more of a traditional conservative. Eisenhower was a particularly notable conservative, and is generally regarded as a successful president. Nixon was likewise extremely successful, and managed to significantly dampen inflation, despite being generally bad on racial issues (although he did enforce desegregation orders, but he was also working to pull the teeth of the civil rights act to appease white southerners), and generally being a thief and liar. His re-election was a complete blow-out, winning every single state except Delaware.
We’ve also got this weird idea that being ‘liberal’ is some kind of magic, that libs are going to do wonderful, magical things as soon as they have majorities in the house and senate, and have the presidency. We’ve seen that NYS, CA, and IL can’t address shit in their own borders–e.g., housing/homelessness, and Obama did very, very little to advance a significant progressive agenda aside from the very weak and watered down ACA. Biden is just going to policies that existed prior to the Trump toxic clownshow.
That is kinda my point, the meaning of “conservative” changes a lot through the centuries it has been used, and the only consistent part seems to be the assholes using it as a “friendly” sounding mask.
And your perspective of the public opinion of liberals is entirely too informed by mainstream media. Many leftists dislike liberals for not being leftist enough, and moderates seem to only expect maintenance of the status quo, not magic
Many leftists dislike liberals for not being leftist enough,
That would be me, right there. The older I get, the farther left I go, and the more disillusioned I get with what I thought Dems had been promising for the 45+ years of my life. Not that Republicans have made my life better in any meaningful way; NAFTA might have improved the bottom line of businesses, but it killed my career in it’s infancy when GM/Ford/Chrysler all moved manufacturing south of the border to take advantage of cheap labor. Meanwhile Biden doesn’t seem to be doing a lot to help labor either, esp. since he killed the railroad strike before it happened.
I don’t want a status quo.
I don’t want a status quo either, I’m also a leftist.
I’m just trying to describe things as I see them.
No true Scotsman much?
So Manchin and Sinema are libs, right? Because they claim to be.
Nobody on planet earth thinks they are liberals. No one.
When two random assholes claim a label and all the other pressure who claim it disagree, they’re just two random assholes.
When 99% of the people claiming a label are a certain kind of asshole, that label describes what kind of asshole they are.
Hey now, I know the average Bush voter in the late 90s wasn’t like this. Blind hate for half the country just destroys the country. This is a new problem.
Whatever this new thing is, the small group doing this - not the ever growing group being exposed and converted by it - deserves everything you’re saying. But don’t give up on your conservative family members. We’ll figure out how to stop the flow of hateful brain junk food eventually. We can go back to just politically disagreeing with them, instead of being irrationally hated by them. And vice versa.
They weren’t quite like this but there was still shitty conservatives in much the same way… The extremists weren’t the core yet though. They were absolutely still there and voting for Bush, they just weren’t allowed to be the face of the party… Yet.
Respectfully disagree. Since Reagan the right has been completely fine with utter hypocrisy in the service of - well, ultimately nothing though for awhile they would say it was in the service of national security, or Christianity or something like that. Reagan republicans actively worked to fool the working class into giving them more and more power by lying, using “morning in America” commercials, and otherwise laying the groundwork for what became the fox news nation we now know and love so well.
The fact that otherwise good people who would help others and meant for everyone to get a fair chance etc. would steadfastly give their votes to them every election became more of a house of mirrors and lots of analysis as to how that could possibly be when their policies are so obviously cruel / stupid / nonexistent.
TL;DR - Propaganda works. “The average person” is criminally under-informed in many ways.
I hope this is ok to say, but I don’t think there was any part of what I said that you disagreed with.
I completely agree on all points. Those people have a dishonest agenda and they’ve figured out how to manipulate human nature to get what they need from part of an otherwise-good populace.
You forgot my favorite: every accusation is a confession.
^ how you radicalize yourself
Antifa literally means “anti-fascist.” Anyone who fought against the Nazis in WWII was “antifa.”
And Scott Adams lost his f*cking mind years ago.
You can swear on the internet fyi
You can swear on the internet fyi
Maybe she didn’t want to though
Saying f*ck instead of fuck is just as much swearing. Potentially even more so, since you actively want to avoid word filters.
It is also kind of like saying “f*cking a**hole” isn’t an insult.
I love how much effort you put into pedantry. It’s like you use the most words possible to make the least amount of point lmao
I completely agree with the commenter above. Self censoring swear words is absolutely ridiculous. Either swear or don’t - that’s your choice. Comments that insult other community members (directly or indirectly) without adding anything interesting to the conversation are not welcome here.
I completely disagree with you both.
If you feel it’s “insulting” to find judgmental comments that add zero to the discuss except being negative to another community member pedantic, I don’t know what to tell you.
In all honestly, ya’ll’s comments are the same kind of negative as mine. Who cares how someone else chooses to write? How is bemoaning someone’s choice of spelling or self-censor “adding anything interesting to the conversation.” It certainly makes that commenter feel like shit. So who’s rule breaking here?
Why are you being such a ************ about this?
You need to have had something in the first place to lose it.
I know at least 4 (I wanna say 6 but 4 confirmed confidently) righty leaning lads who are anti trans for what they will say are varied, diverse, weighty reasons - who all collectively tell the same story word for word any and everytime trans issues come up…
“I hit it off with a girl on Tinder, then two days in before we met or got serious or even talked all that much (just enough for me to be smitten) they told me they were trans, and I’m not a bigot, BUT IF THEY DON’T PUT THAT SHIT IN THEIR BIO THEY DESERVE WHATEVER HAPPENS TO THEM”
Nobody understands when I explain that their violent response to a trans woman on tinder is why trans women don’t put it in their bio.
Shocker.
It’s more dangerous to put it in your profile than saying it to someone in person?
Wow, had to check this one was real, and jokes on me it’s still up on his Twitter, complete with him stubbornly defending himself against everyone telling him he’s nuts. How did the Dilbert guy lose his mind so completely?
I would like to direct your attention to the Behind the Bastards podcast episode entitled “Part One: How The Dilbert Guy Lost His Mind” from July 11th, 2023.
Your wording was perfect.
Summary? I’m technically at work right now, so pulling out the headphones I left at home anyways isn’t quite an option.
He’s always been a little like this but pretty quiet and subtle about it. However once he started losing his ability to speak he lost a lot of social interaction and kinda went nuts.
It absolutely is worth a listen though (as is the rest of the podcast).
I remember him being on TV (want to say it was Real Time) and talking up Trump. He definitely was on the right before he lost his voice.
He lost his voice starting in like 2005 or 2006, then got surgery to fix it in 2008. Real Time was running starting in '03, but that was way before Trump was politically relevant so I’m betting you saw him after he’d lost his voice, alienated everyone in his life and gone nutty, then gotten it back.
That about sums it up. Love the podcast as well.
deleted by creator
The Behind the Bastards feature on him posited he was always obsessed with predestiny and being some kind of fountain of wisdom. His fame and seclusion just tipped him over the edge from mere asshole into raging lunatic.
He needs to go from a shut-in to a shut-up.
Or he was a shut in for a while because he experienced a massive personality change
He never had much of it in the first place.
LOL, Scott Adams can’t cope with reality so he has to make up history to make himself feel better.
The fact that he’s rich is the only reason he hasn’t been Baker acted.
Dude has really went off the deep end.
He’s become the ignorant “manager” he got famous making fun of.
I don’t think that is so surprising. Scott Adams spent most of his career as a manager, not a developer. He probably prided himself in not being the ignorant manager, but at this point I have to question if he was just deluding himself.
Like Peterson, Scott Adams was at least interesting to read in 2016, even if you don’t agree with him. His analysis on why Trump eventually won was actually a pretty good read.
But it seems that going deep into the conservative echo chamber turns everyone in it completely insane and paranoid, until they are nothing but a parody of their former self.
So I think the main idea of conservatism is ironically being self destructive.
Scott Adams did not lose his fucking mind.
He never had one.
It just took a long time for people to see this.
I don’t think it is unreasonable to assume people are sane until proven otherwise.
The problem is some people get comfortable with their opinion of someone and won’t change it when presented with new information.
People, by default, assume because he made stuff people liked that he was a sane, rational person. No matter how much talent or money someone has they’re still as prone to having batshit insane takes as anyone else you may encounter.
The antifa movement was literally birthed as a response to the rise of fascism in Europe.
This dude is basically just writing historical fanfiction at this point. Add vampires or zombies and maybe he could sell a book.
Unfortunately, he’s sold LOTS of books.
“I passed sixth grade social studies and you have lost your fucking mind.”
It’s just so sad that they think that antifa is some organization, like “vegetarianism” would be one as well
Not unlike how some media is working on presenting the fediverse as a singular organization.
It’s as if some can’t conceive of humans organizing without a corporate overseer.
I’m so happy I stopped paying attention to mainstream media.
“Who is this four chan?”
They really can’t. Anonymous was something that corporate media simply couldn’t explain.
Oh they’d have been able to explain it if it benefitted the rich for people to understand it…
How will the masses be good lil subordinates once they realise they hold the true power?
Always neat to see Tweets of people who are about to be blocked by Scott Adams
WTF.
Every now and then you run into a confident claim that is so unbelievably detached from reality that there’s nowhere to even start debunking it lol. Can’t believe this guy went from Dilbert to… whatever this is in just a handful of years.
I mean…Dilbert was pretty low on the ladder. So the fall from grace wasn’t too far.
It wasn’t high art or anything, but it was almost aggressively non-offensive. Just an engineer complaining about silly work things. Can you imagine how disastrous things would go if he attempted to draw Dilbert with his current views? Although, from googling, it looks like that’s actually what he’s planning to do lol. Jesus.
As someone who occasionally read Dilbert back in the day, I do have to say that the “author self-insert character is always right and always complaining, and everyone else is always an idiot” tropes are well-tilled soil for right-wing outrage culture.
Add in there that he already had an “perpetually angry woman” character and “Indian office worker stereotype” character, and it becomes even easier to see how he got there.
For anyone not aware and to spare you from giving him traffic, one recent comic of his had the first black guy ever in a dilbert comic. That man then gave the punchline “I identify as white”.
Scott is way off his rocker and has apparently decided to go all in on conspiracy nonsense.
That’s when Pauli has your back:
“That is not only not right; it is not even wrong”
I have to think about more and more at the moment.
Anyone listen to the Behind the Bastards pod on Adams? It was a two-parter that was awesome. Google it Lemmies.
Care to synopsize?
He was a very special boy who thought he was smarter than everyone else.
Now he’s a dipshit racist alt-righter (redundant, I know) who thinks he’s smarter than everyone else.
That took a two-part podcast to regale? Hunh.
edit: When summarizing, it’s fairly elementary, if not outright essential, to include salient points from the source in question. For instance, the “summary” below completely omits the section (wherein the host blasts this nazi clown for his islamophobia) that, apparently, went on for several minutes. Downvote all you want, former Redditors. Go touch some grass. 🤗
One can sum up The Odyssey as “a bunch of dudes try to get home from war,” but it’s more about the journey than the destination.
Are you equating the nuance of a timeless literary classic to a sheltered white guy’s childhood? For real?
No, I’m saying that if you ask someone to summarize a lengthy piece then it’s a bit ridiculous to complain about the lack of details.
Yes, and I’m starting that if you attempt to summarize, do be sure to touch on key points rather than boiling it down to such a degree that it’s indistinguishable from mud. Pretty basic stuff, friend. Thanks for trying, though.
Why did your summary leave out that he blamed black people for his getting fired?
3/10, try harder next time.
