Unraveling the Fallout of Scott Adams' Bold Remarks

Yeah. And you've basically said this, but I feel like I'd be remiss if I didn't spell it out. It's it's just funny that he's calling out racism against whites by being racist towards blacks. Like you're not solving anything by doing the exact same thing that you're taking issue with. Hello and welcome to Awake at the Wheel. So in today's episode, we're going to be exploring some of the work of Scott Adams. So many would have initially known him for his work with Dilbert. I remember looking at Dilbert comics as a small child and thinking they were painfully boring because it was about some dude in an office who hated his job. So that's the extent of my knowledge of Dilbert. But beyond that, he's getting a lot of notoriety these days because he's been speaking up a lot about some of the injustices that whites are experiencing as far as its focus on race in the world in general, on social media and so on. So we're going to start out by just having a little bit of a discussion here about it and then watch a video that brought about quite a significant I was surprised at the significant reaction that I had to it because it made me quite angry. But I think it's a good starting point for us to chat about. But Oren, what do you want to say about Scott Adams before we jump in? Okay, So I've been watching Scott Adams daily. You know, when I work out or do other stuff for the last number of years, at least three or four years, I believe. I cite him in class. I tell my patients about him, and I used to enjoy his comic Dilbert when I was I was older when I was reading it. So I appreciate it. And it's almost a it's a it's a Howard Stern effect. I watch him because I dislike some of the stuff he says so much. I dislike him so much. I can't help but listen to it. And that's how Howard Stern got so popular, right? People want to hear what's he gonna say next. Right. But so I'm going to get the bad parts out of the way first, because I want people to understand I'm not a sycophant. I know exactly what he's doing. I have commented on many of his videos negatively because and the first I think maybe the first one I'm not sure of is the very first. But a number of years ago, it was around Christmas time, I think three, two or three Christmases ago, where he basically stated in his usual, let's say, arrogant manner, and I'm going to say narcissistic. Now, I'm not diagnosing him, but the reason I'm saying narcissistic because he declared that narcissism was not a thing. He said there's no such thing as narcissistic personality disorder. And now he's going on and on. And it's I think it's because, you know, many people were calling Trump a narcissist and he has stated his affinity for Trump many, many, many times. You got notoriety later in his career in 2016 by being one of the first people, aside from Ann Colter, to predict that Trump would win the election early on, very early on. And he explained exactly why he said that, because he was talking about the persuasive techniques of Trump's. And at the beginning, when I'd hear him say, This is what Trump did, here's what he's saying, and here's the, you know, the brilliance behind it. I was thinking that I'm not diagnosing from afar, but I was thinking I would say a saying that can be easily and equally explained by someone who has a nasty law who's a narcissist and tarses would do exactly the same thing that Trump was doing. Somehow Trump parlayed it into success. In many ways, I think it's more a result of the fact that the people that he was opposing aren't that bright. Okay. Like truly, Because if anyone had half any kind of intelligence, they would have been able to take all the stuff that he said and did not get lured in. They would have been able to use it, you know, to highlight Trump's foibles. So to me, again, it wasn't some 4D chess that Trump was playing. These were the words and actions of a narcissist. Once again, I'm not diagnosing him, but that's how I sort of explain that. Okay. So anyway, so around Christmastime, he declares it's not a thing because he thought narcissism was just having confidence, believing in yourself, being a leader. Okay. And then he actually did some reading on it. And a few weeks later, he did a mea culpa. I said, my God, I had no idea. You know, there's people like that. And then there's the actual narcissistic personality disorder. So he did admit that he got that wrong. However, in his his usual Scott Adams fashion, his narcissistic fashion, I say narcissism because he declares himself a narcissism, a narcissist story. He proudly declares himself a narcissist because he didn't understand what he had actually investigated because he breaks it down. And, you know, a lot of people go on the Internet and they read about the grandiose versus the or there's overt and covert or the grandiose versus the vulnerable narcissist. And I came off we talk about this a previous podcast, but it pisses me off. And they call grand, you know, grandiose versus vulnerable because all narcissists are vulnerable if you actually understand what narcissism is, it's all about vulnerability, trying to protect and try to avoid, you know, the reality of who you really are. But anyway, so he believed that grandiose narcissists are actually good people who want to do good for the world. Yes. They're you know, they have a high to high self esteem. Yes, they're hyperbolic. Yes, they can be overly extroverted or whatever, But they are the ones who just want to do good for the world and they want to get recognition for it. Okay. I just had to jump in because it drives me nuts. Like not and we we've talked about this before, that everyone thinks that they're an expert on these things, but who the hell is he to comment on these things? He has no, as far as I know, no educational background that would support him making such broad statements about a disorder that he clearly doesn't understand. But here we are. But anyways, go on. Well, that's you know, that's what's so enraging for a lot of people. And he actually used that as his cause. It's like a superpower that I don't have to be an expert on certain topics, whether it's climate change, economics, whatever they said, because he says, I use a filter. He's a certain filter. And he always talks about how he's a hypnotist, He's a trained publicist for many years, and he says that he's an expert in persuasiveness or persuasion. And so he says, use a certain filter and he's able to analyze claims that he sees in the media through this filter. And he claims more often than not, he gets it right. And he will always say, I'm the first person who said this or, you know, no one else told you this or I've got the perfect track record on predictions, etc.. Okay. Very hyperbolic. He he he claims that he will acknowledges mistakes and everything and he will acknowledge a few of them, but he always spins in a way that makes him look pretty good. All right. So like a narcissist. But the point is, by the way, if anyone's wondering the kind of narcissism he's talking about, if anything would be altruistic narcissism, the person who seems to be doing good for others. But unlike most people, the the motives that they get, their motives and their intentions are different when they are doing these supposedly good things. But anyway, a little side note there. But he always talks about that and he brags about being a grandiose narcissist. So I can say he's a narcissist because I'm using his own words. So that's one of the problems. The other problem, and this is huge is actually starting to see the strength and the problem. One of his talents is he frames things in a certain way and I know we're either doing this podcast or in another podcast, some of his framing it, it really is, let's say, impactful. I appreciate it. And he talks about and he has a whole book on everything. It's called How to Reframe Your Brain. I haven't read it, but it says there's like maybe a hundred and some odd refrains that he admits. He says maybe 5% of people or 10% are going to read it and go, wow, it's going to click. They're going to it's going to resonate and it's going to help them see things differently, Baker says. Reframing alcohol as Poison. Okay. And that's one of the examples. So he talks about, I mean, here in this podcast where he frames things in ways where I go, Wow, that's actually pretty clever or it resonates or it will help people, you know, motivate themselves to do something better. So that's a positive. The negative of it is and this is where he's persuasive for people who don't know what he's doing, but when he's framing things in a certain way and he says it with such confidence and and such, these very compelling when he says it, it actually makes a lot of sense. And it's a great explanation if you don't include all these alternative explanations or alternative factors. Right. It's a very narrow or a myopic way of looking at things, not always, but many times. And a lot of his listeners, you know, again, they're getting caught up in in everything and they're hearing what he said that makes sense. But they're ignoring all the other stuff that would give a totally different perspective on what he's claiming. And that seems so disingenuous and unethical because I guarantee he knows that he's doing that. And if you sprinkle in some good stuff that's, you know, true and helpful, then people are going to be more likely to believe that the crap that he's putting out there, too, or the half truths or whatever. Right. And it's a funny thing is sometimes he's even saying what he's doing. Okay. So there's like a good magician, like when they're saying, Here's what I'm doing. Like Penn and Teller should do that. It was still entertaining, but they're explaining what they're doing. But other times he's not. Right. So if he's giving the illusion of I'm always explaining what I'm doing, therefore you can trust me while not always explaining it and he's actually still doing it, then it's very easy to pull the wool over people's eyes. And, you know, again, I've, I will comment on his videos about that. He's never responded to me. But again, that's why I say I tell my patients, I say, if you ever watch, I say, I don't know how you watch them live. Here's the slowest speaker ever. I listen to my two times speed and it's still too slow. I think I was a most people on 1.5 to 2 with him. I want to be for time speed and I could maybe tolerate it, but I don't know how they can listen to one regular speed. So. So there are a lot of flaws. So I want to be very clear on this, Right. And the other thing is and we'll talk about this when you bring up the video. All right. Another thing he does and it is very disingenuous, just outright deceitful, same disingenuous, outright deceitful and manipulative is that he will he'll say something. Either he'll say it in a way that it's it's like called readers, which is, you know, I'll make a statement that's vague and ambiguous enough that, you know, that when it comes true, I can see I said it. However, what I said could have played out is point, you know, in trajectory A, B or C because it was vague and ambiguous enough. So I can claim yes, yes or yes, I called it okay, or you'll say something and you'll get called out on it. And then afterwards he'll say, Well, here's what I was doing. So he's rationalizing after the fact, okay. And trying to, you know, make an argument for why he what he said was not so bad. And again, we'll talk about this. And and he said, why or I meant to do it. This you know, I meant to do this. What you just saw. And again, that just sounds like a narcissist trying to justify. And again, I'm saying he called himself narcissist. Okay. But he's trying to justify things after the fact, which again, for some people, especially if you if you find him persuasive, especially if you like him, you will gloss over all the other facts and say that makes sense. But for others who are more critical thinkers, you know, wait a second, that doesn't really hold water. Now, the thing is, final point is so many of his haters, they do either take him out of context or they don't understand the point or they're just being totally irrational. And and they do have maybe Trump derangement syndrome. So he's over. He's forever intertwined with Trump for supporting him and being a fan of his. And so, you know, anything he says, they just can't register and they're being totally irrational. So I want to be clear here. I that's why I said it. I think he has a lot of good points. I think he's he can be very helpful. Some of his frames are amazing or his reframes. I really like them, which is why I do you know, I do recommend his videos or his podcast to my patients and students. I say, you know, don't don't buy into wholesale. Look at it. And, you know, maybe 50%, 70, 80, whatever you'll say, you know, that actually has some value. All right. Or maybe only 5%. But anyway, the point is, I'm not one of his haters and I'm not one of his sycophants. I'm someone who can call both sides. I just wanted to put that all out there so I know the wrong thing here based on people accusing me of being one or the other. So yeah, they're. And to that point, that is why I was so surprised at the reaction I had to this video that we're about to watch. I actually read an article about it because usually I'm somewhere in the middle. I don't jump to conclusion. And I do in many contexts believe that white people are being shit on. So I agree with the sentiments of a lot of what he's saying. But the way in which this is being spun, I feel, is not telling the whole story and is pumping out a certain narrative that he's trying to and and trying to maybe manipulate people into following what he's saying. But let's stop talking about the video and let's watch the video and then we can talk some more about it. Okay. Just just so listeners can clearly garner why they took issue with that. But I'm just pulling up some additional information here about what that poll is that he was referring to. So first of all, it was a poll of a limited number of people. It was not representative of all black people. So let's, you know, get that out of the way first. So this was from let's see here. So the poll indicated that 53% of black Americans who were polled agreed with the statement that it's okay to be white. I've recently learned that this it's okay to be white. Statement is often likened to all Lives Matter, which has become some sort of intertwined with hate speech or creating some sort of narrative or promoting some sort of narrative. But I wonder if the people who were polled actually know that. But point being, there's there's many layers to this poll that he's referencing that he completely oversimplified in that statement. Okay. So now what he was saying this he he had been talking prior to this video about trying to get himself canceled or he's threatening to or and he's you want to bring a lot of attention to himself. And and he said, by the way, he says after it is always hyperbolic statement he said not one black person disagree with me or not one black conservative disagreed with me. Okay. And he says that any time I explain this to anybody, they all completely agree with what I said. And and I've heard some of his interviews and not everybody agrees completely with what he said. I've seen many black people say, no, I've heard your explanation, but I don't buy it. Now, if I were black, I don't know if I would be able to. You know, understand what he's really doing. And, you know, I don't know if I'd give him the benefit of the doubt afterwards, because it does sound like a really horrific statement. Okay. But having followed him for the months up to that and subsequently, you know, his explanations everything to me, I know what he was doing. I do believe what he was doing. But I think the way that he did it was just so terrible. And and, you know, he got attention. Great. That's what he's trying to do. But there were there could have been different ways to get attention. And he understands, even though he's not an expert on it, he does understand to some degree human psychology and once people once something's in the narrative, once people say, my God, he said that, you know, black people are hateful or they're a hate group and whites shouldn't be with them and everything like that, Once that's out there, it's really hard to undo. And he knows that, right? So, you know, there's different ways that he could have been provocative then got the same message across was we'll talk about what the actual message was. But again, I just seen him enough and I can give him the benefit of the doubt of what he was trying to do because he's been very consistent in it. But again, terrible execution. And and I think that subsequently he has been saying that he knows that he kind of like misjudged how he played it out. Okay. Like, you know, how he presented it. So so as far as, you know, what you're saying in terms of, you know, what he was trying to do, can you elaborate on what it was de was trying to do? Because I don't know a whole lot about Scott Adams and his his goal and his mission and so on. And even this specific issue of it's okay to be white, I guess that there's some implication of a history in white supremacy. And it's it's not a good thing for people to say. So with that in mind, what is he trying to do? Okay. Well, the statement of know again, it's okay to be white. I don't think he was he was definitely not factoring in the the 4chan, you know, usage of it, of trying to troll people and everything or trying to make it a hateful statement. It wasn't that he was taking it. And I can't remember if afterwards whether he has revised his position on it. But he was saying that literally almost half of black people thought that it was not okay to be white. Now, I know that I know that he's heard other people saying there's more nuance to it. And, you know, there were other it wasn't that they actually were saying that's some are saying, well, I don't know. And, you know, the majority actually said that it is okay. All right. So anyway, so I, I can't remember initially when he started with that, if he understood the question itself and the actual implications. But what he's trying to do, the main point was and he's been saying this again for a very long time, he's been talking about how the media, the schools and the government for many years have been stoking interracial division and suspicion, mistrust and hatred between all, you know, again, different racial groups. And he's been calling them out frequently. And, you know, kudos to him for doing that. I've been doing the same thing. Certain narratives have been promulgated within those different groups I just mentioned or the systems that are really making people not trust each other. And so what he said was and he said this afterwards, like the very next day, imagine saying the same clip, okay? Afterwards, he said, If you're living in a neighborhood, he said, imagine you're a black person, okay? And you go into a neighborhood and you see a bunch of, you know, like I think you see KKK members in your neighborhood, right? Or if you knew that 47% of the neighborhood were anti-black, that you wouldn't want to live there like, you know, you want to get the hell out of there. Right. So what you're saying was, if you're and you said that in society today and he's just talking about white people being shit on and he said for the last 40 years or so, he says, 30 or 40 years ago, anyone whose work and I'm not American, so I don't know. Okay. I know in the last ten years at least, it seems true. But he says that if they said if you are a white or if you've worked in corporate America for the last 30 or 40 years, again, this is hyperbole. He said Every single person who's done that will know that white people have been discriminated against. And he talks about three different three or four cases where he was outright told, We're not going to give you a promotion because you are a white male. Okay. So he's saying that this guy or those types of, let's say, initiatives were being implicated like 30, 40 years prior? Okay. So he's basically been saying, again, he's been very consistent in what he's been saying. He said it for years prior to making that statement where he once again, he's saying that if you go to a school, you know, white kids are being told you're the problem, you know, you're the cause of all this. America was built on racism. America is still as racist as it was, you know, several hundred years ago and so on. So I do like the fact that he is pointing out how all this racism really is being fomented and is being thrust in people's faces and that everything is seen through the lens of race. And, you know, in cases where if there's an incident that happened that has nothing to do with race, race will be the first thing that's still being mentioned. So being very it's very manipulative and so on. So that was what he's trying to say. And again, he's been very consistent in very different areas, especially with education. And I agree on that. When we see, you know, that, you know, that so many decisions in schools, in hospitals and, you know, in politics, in law are being made on the basis of race and when it shouldn't be. And we've talked about, you know, race numerous times. And again, I'm not saying racism doesn't exist. I'm not saying that there's not disadvantaged groups and so on. We're not saying that. But he's saying that it's gone way overboard. And this was his way of calling it out. And again, it could have been done much better. But that was, you know, what he's trying to do. So there's you know, that's that's my style. Manningham Yeah. And you've basically said this, but I feel like I'd be remiss if I didn't spell it out. It's it's just funny that he's calling out racism against whites by being racist towards blacks. Like you're not solving anything by doing the exact same thing that you're taking issue with. And here's the thing that he always says, okay, and again, if I were black, I'd have a hard time buying it. I'd say it kind of sounds like the old well, my son, my best friends are black. Okay. But he always says, I love black people. He says, When I talk about black people, he says, I'm not talking. Every single one is the same as when I talk about women or any other group. I'm not saying all women or all black people, he says. Individual, he says, I've never he said, I've never once in my life ever had a bad interaction with any black people ever, which I kind of find hard to believe because how can you say that you've never in your entire life had a negative interaction if you say it wasn't based on race, fine. But say, you know, I've just try to think about that like, you know, driving or in a shopping call or whatever. Like to say that never. That seems a bit hyperbolic. But the point is, he says, I love black people all the time. And he also used to identify as black, which again, for years he was saying that I identify as black because I want to be on the winning team again, that can be you know, it can be very insulting if I'm black and you can't just do that. Okay? Like, it's just it's it's wrong. But because of his, let's say, his self self-diagnosed narcissistic tendencies, he doesn't think about how other people will see it, even though he's so persuasive. And he's always talking about how, you know, he's so great with that. He truly doesn't think about how, you know, an individual human who's going to hear that would feel about that. He's just thinking about the end goal of trying to make this point and try and get it across. You know, I think it'll be effective and well, if some people get their feelings hurt or some people feel offended, too bad. Okay. And then again, I'm not justifying that. I'm just saying that that's one of his flaws. So anyway, the point being that he's claiming that he wasn't, you know, again, criticizing any individual black person. He was just saying if it's that many and again, he's saying, I'm not even blaming black people for thinking this. He's saying any group he said this very and clearly any group, if you're constantly being told that society is against you and in this case, black people are constantly starting from childhood, especially in schools, are constantly being told that you're being raised in a racist society where, you know, the majority of people who happen to be white, you know, they eat you. They're going to do everything in their power to hurt you, to disadvantage you, to disempower you. Okay. You saying that if you're being told that, then how can you have any trust or affinity or any kind of healthy relationship with those people? Or, you know, how can you ever even feel good about yourself? How can you ever feel good about your future if you're being told you're doomed because all these people hate you? So they just flip turned on his head and said, you know, again, that that he used the example of black people hating white people. You know he's trying to not be ironic might be the wrong word, but he's trying to, you know again make the same point but in reverse. And again, when he explains that people go, I get that, okay, But he could have done it in a much better way. And I suppose to a degree, we can appreciate the fact that, you know, he is a comedian. I mean, he did a comic that was intended to be funny. And maybe his dry humor isn't translating into these topics very clearly. But, you know, let's maybe consider that a little bit as well. But another thing that he has said that I really take issue with is this blanket statement that Democrats suffer from mental illness. And he can tell by looking at their eyes that they are demonic and and so on and so forth. So, okay, few things. Yes, there is certain body language that, you know, we as clinicians are trained to recognize that can sometimes led to either certain disorders or characteristics or behaviors or whatever the case may be. So there are definitely clues that we can glean from people's body language. But to make such a definite statement in such a broad, sweeping statement about an entire group of people, I certainly take issue with that as well. So what are your thoughts on that? Okay. Well, because I know we're coming to the end of this podcast, I think that I'll make a comment and I think that maybe we can do another podcast where we piggyback off of this and we talk about some of the statements like that that he's made that are really offending people. And again, he's doing it to be provocative. So, you know, maybe so if I can talk about that now. Okay. Actually, you know, I would rather talk about the fallout from what happened with that statement that he made. Okay. And then if you don't mind, we can do this. We can answer that question, a great teaser trailer for the next podcast, and that'll will be one of several provocative statements he's made. If that's okay. Of course. Okay. So let's just talk about the fallout after he said all that. Okay? Every single Dilbert comic, comic, starting with I figure which one it was, I think was The Washington Post. They were the one I think the main distributors of this Dilbert comic, every single one canceled him his publisher canceled him. Everyone had a professional connection with him, cancel them. So he truly was canceled. And now he's thriving more than ever before because he does have, you know, different avenues of, you know, where he can make money and his fans support him. And now he's saying he's freer than ever, now that he's not beholden to any media company or anyone else, he can say what he couldn't say before. So I do believe that his you know, that provocative statement was intended and it seemed like he was ramping up prior to that. But you're saying like he did want to get canceled. He really did, because now he can say things that others can't. Now he claims that he's one of the most influential people on the planet. He said that if he can get 1 million people on Twitter, that then he would be unstoppable. Again, it's the grandiosity is astounding. It is. Okay. I can see that you're not a fan of this. Obviously, having. This. You tell it and a lot of people are not okay. But you know what? He gets retweeted by Elon Musk. Vivek, you know, Vivek has, as you know, Trump has invited him to the White House a lot of powerful people. But if I can respond to that, I am not a fan of the statements that he makes. I don't know him as a person. Perhaps he's a lovely human being. Maybe he is. But I find it very irresponsible when people have such a huge platform and they make statements like that because they are so influential, people are going to believe what he's saying and that is irresponsible. So that's what I take issue with. Definitely. And again, if he's someone who understands some media works, he's so influential and persuasive and so on, he should know. Like I said, once that goes out of the bottle, that's what people are hearing. They're not hearing all the nuance and all the other good and well-intentioned facets of his narrative. They're only hearing that one thing. So I agree with you. One, I'm not justifying what he said at all. Again, it was poorly done. And, you know, I've seen him do this so many times with so many things. And after the fact, he's saying, voila, here's what is doing all along and here's how, you know, this is my grand plan. Okay. So, yeah, I agree with you. And so if people find him off putting. Yeah, I get it. I fully do. And again, that's why I warn my patients. It's like there was a book years ago called I think I mentioned before the game was like a peek into the secret life of pickup artist. And I used to say to my patients, I say, If you can get through the crap, if you can read and just see that there are some positive points, you know, that would help, you know, be able to better engage with people of the opposite sex or whoever you're interested in. Okay, I said, Great. Just filter out all the stuff that would make you a terrible, hateful human being, then that's great. So with Scott Adams, I am able to and maybe because I'm also a white male that you know, that prudery there, but I think it was kind of like it wasn't so much the camaraderie because again, as a as a person, I can't stand it. I really don't I don't like how he presents. I don't like the grandiosity. I don't like the you know, he's I can be hyperbolic as well, but I'm mindful of the impact that the hyperbole can have on. But you're also tactful. Well, that's it exactly. Yeah. I'm not going to agree, but I try to be tactful. So again, so I'm able to filter out because it's not affecting me personally. I'm not one of the groups that he's targeting that sort of impact being the white male, not the camaraderie. But I'm not his target. Okay? That I, I look at what he's trying to do and I do believe he has good intentions with trying to point out some of the ways that society, at least in the West, is being truly harmed. And that's why in our next podcast on Scott Adams, we'll talk more about some of the points he's raised and we'll talk about the demonic, demonic, demonic Democrats that you mentioned. I promise you we'll talk about that in depth. Okay. All right. So tune in next episode. We're going to continue the conversation about Scott Adams, get into some more detail about his commentary and what we think about it. And as you can expect in the next episode, we're probably not going to see eye to eye, but that's okay. All right. And until that until next time, keep your eyes on the road and your hands upon the wheel.