3 ms·

Perhaps people can decide by themselves: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Adams#Political_views https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Adams#Political_views

negzero7 9mo ago
[flagged]
- simonw 9mo ago
  Do you have a better link that can help people understand the gist of his political opinions that isn't Wikipedia?
  - mike_apostol 9mo ago
    https://grokipedia.com/page/Scott_Adams https://grokipedia.com/page/Scott_Adams
    - weberer 9mo ago
      People are downvoting this as a knee-jerk reaction, but that page actually does a way better job of explaining the issues.
- faefox 9mo ago
  Maybe you could share some of his well-reasoned positions with us, then? :)
- BobaFloutist 9mo ago
  Well I'm certainly not going to spend thousands of hours listening to his talking to decide how to feel about his thoughts and opinions.
  - negzero7 9mo ago
    That's fair, but also maybe don't base an opinion on 4 paragraphs from wikipedia on topics obviously nuanced.
    - rbanffy 9mo ago
      I would imagine whoever wrote those 4 paragraphs has researched a lot more than I did about his political views. If someone with better sources went there and corrected any mistakes made previously, with referenced demonstrating it, the article would be much improved.
      - hulitu 9mo ago
        > I would imagine whoever wrote those 4 paragraphs has researched a lot more than I did about his political views We all have imagined that. But taking a look at the sources in Wikipedia articles becomes ... interesting.
        rbanffy 9mo ago
        If you have better sources, then please, improve the article.
    - BobaFloutist 9mo ago
      What should I base it on? You?
      - negzero7 9mo ago
        You don't need to have an opinion on everything. Clearly you don't care about this or you would spend the time watching some of his videos or reading his articles that expound on his "controversial" statements. It's ok to just say "I don't know" rather than thinking you're well informed because Wikipedia says so.
- DonHopkins 9mo ago
  negzero7: Please explain how exactly "Blacks are a hate group" and "White people should stay the hell away from Black people" are well reasoned opinions without revealing that you're a bigoted racist sack of shit too. It proves you're an intellectually dishonest troll when you have to attack wikipedia, while the actual thing that proves Adams was a bigoted racist sack of shit are HIS OWN WORDS, which you can not contest. And that makes you a bigoted racist sack of shit too, for attempting and spectacularly failing at such a dishonest reality denying argument.
carimura 9mo ago
Or in his own words.... many many many hours of them https://www.youtube.com/RealCoffeeWithScottAdams https://www.youtube.com/RealCoffeeWithScottAdams https://scottadams.locals.com/landing/video https://scottadams.locals.com/landing/video
DonHopkins 9mo ago
negzero7: Please explain how exactly "Blacks are a hate group" and "White people should stay the hell away from Black people" are well reasoned opinions without revealing that you're a bigoted racist sack of shit too.

negzero7 9mo ago

[flagged]

simonw 9mo ago
Do you have a better link that can help people understand the gist of his political opinions that isn't Wikipedia?
- mike_apostol 9mo ago
  https://grokipedia.com/page/Scott_Adams https://grokipedia.com/page/Scott_Adams
  - weberer 9mo ago
    People are downvoting this as a knee-jerk reaction, but that page actually does a way better job of explaining the issues.
faefox 9mo ago
Maybe you could share some of his well-reasoned positions with us, then? :)
BobaFloutist 9mo ago
Well I'm certainly not going to spend thousands of hours listening to his talking to decide how to feel about his thoughts and opinions.
- negzero7 9mo ago
  That's fair, but also maybe don't base an opinion on 4 paragraphs from wikipedia on topics obviously nuanced.
  - rbanffy 9mo ago
    I would imagine whoever wrote those 4 paragraphs has researched a lot more than I did about his political views. If someone with better sources went there and corrected any mistakes made previously, with referenced demonstrating it, the article would be much improved.
    - hulitu 9mo ago
      > I would imagine whoever wrote those 4 paragraphs has researched a lot more than I did about his political views We all have imagined that. But taking a look at the sources in Wikipedia articles becomes ... interesting.
      - rbanffy 9mo ago
        If you have better sources, then please, improve the article.
  - BobaFloutist 9mo ago
    What should I base it on? You?
    - negzero7 9mo ago
      You don't need to have an opinion on everything. Clearly you don't care about this or you would spend the time watching some of his videos or reading his articles that expound on his "controversial" statements. It's ok to just say "I don't know" rather than thinking you're well informed because Wikipedia says so.
DonHopkins 9mo ago
negzero7: Please explain how exactly "Blacks are a hate group" and "White people should stay the hell away from Black people" are well reasoned opinions without revealing that you're a bigoted racist sack of shit too. It proves you're an intellectually dishonest troll when you have to attack wikipedia, while the actual thing that proves Adams was a bigoted racist sack of shit are HIS OWN WORDS, which you can not contest. And that makes you a bigoted racist sack of shit too, for attempting and spectacularly failing at such a dishonest reality denying argument.

carimura 9mo ago

Or in his own words.... many many many hours of them https://www.youtube.com/RealCoffeeWithScottAdams https://www.youtube.com/RealCoffeeWithScottAdams https://scottadams.locals.com/landing/video https://scottadams.locals.com/landing/video

DonHopkins 9mo ago

negzero7: Please explain how exactly "Blacks are a hate group" and "White people should stay the hell away from Black people" are well reasoned opinions without revealing that you're a bigoted racist sack of shit too.