The entire EXPLICITLY STATED point of these /pol/ campaigns is to manipulate the media into acting as an engine of radicalization.

“It’s okay to be white” would have died on the vine right next to “Islam is right about women” if the media didn’t go into an amplification feeding frenzy.

Edit: and sure, the cat’s out of the bag and actual racists are probably using the phrase now. But clearly no lesson has been learned - ditching Scott Adams for supposedly making reprehensible racist remarks is going to absolutely set more than a few people down the path of radicalization when they look up what he said and see “it’s okay to be white”. I can only imagine the glee over on 4chan right now.

Local newspapers are dying, one of the few reasons the print editions still exist is for the comics section. Cancelling cartoons because of a podcast is commercial suicide, and so is amplifying idiotic stories about Scott Adams, FourChan, Q, 'the alt-right' (AKA the 'far right' presumably), 'Black Lives Matter' etc etc.

There is terrible black on asian violence in the bay area (where I live), I just saw video of a guy being hacked to death with a machete in San Francisco's tenderloin last month. Adams lives near Oakland, an extremely violent, gang dominated area. In the bay area you can watch fresh video on Twitter every day of black thugs breaking into cars, beating people up, retail theft at a massive scale, holding up restaurants at gunpoint and on and on.

This is all completely unacceptable and it's hard to reconcile the endless bleeding heart restorative justice, reparations for people with ancestors who were slaves, endless victim hustling in the same urban area. I suspect Adams was to a large extent influenced by 'lived experience', to co opt a progressive cliche.

I'd expect an aging author to become wiser and more understanding, Adams was getting more and more radical and the segregationist comments were just the straw that broke the camels back.

Local California newspapers are already full of junk establishment syndicated news stories and woke oped pieces written by junior journalism graduates who have strong radical progressive activist views and agendas. Reader comments (if allowed) tell a story of dissatisfaction in these publications. There is less and less reason to buy them.

I think Dilbert is a terrific cartoon strip that punctures the pretense of large corporation human resources hubris. I don't care what the author of this cartoon strips views are. I'm not interested in what Charles Schultz (Peanuts) political views were either.

Recent strips are all about "woke millenials don't want to work" and other right wing facebook tropes.

20 years ago Dilbert strips were sometimes funny, the recent ones just aren't anymore.

Why are people trying to make this guy sound clever and self aware? He sounds unhinged

For example: It was common for alt-right speakers to find and doxx trans people at universities they would be invited to. Of course, allies would try to protest these speakers coming to universities because they would doxx trans people at them. But trying to keep them off campus plays right into the "we're being oppressed, academia is a leftist hivemind hellscape" narrative that the very same doxxers try to spin. So the only option is to let them come on and doxx trans people? I don't really know. It's nasty.

They've been doing it the entire time. There was no amplification feeding frenzy, but the racists have been patently forcing hte meme for something like 18 months with stickering, banner drops, coordinated shitposts etc.

going to absolutely set more than a few people down the path of radicalization

Who, the ultra-late adopters? Dilbert went on an anti-woke trajectory a few years ago.

But that's not all he said at all...

He said:

"Black America is a hate group"

"the best advice I would give to white people is to get the hell away from Black people. Just get the fuck away. Wherever you have to go, just get away. Because there’s no fixing this. This can’t be fixed."

"So that's what'd I did. I went to a neighborhood with a very low black population."

"I don’t think it makes any sense as a white citizen of America to try to help Black citizens anymore"

...pretending all he said was "It's ok to be white" is completely disingenuous.

Going on about how even asking the question is racist is a lame criticism. A bunch of white supremacists touched a nerve and revealed a bunch of anti-white racism in the population. It is how it is. The only way to fight against their propaganda is not to defame the people saying this - it’s to not be racist.

For example, if you asked me whether it was important to secure a future for white children, I’d react negatively even though I am white because I know that phrasing and the related belief structure is tightly bound to the white supremacist movement. That doesn’t mean I don’t want white children to have a great future - as a father that’d be abhorrent - but I want that for all children and I specifically don’t want anything I say or do to be construed as supporting the kind of people who rally around the 14 words.

That's only true if you're painfully context-blind, or if you live in a non-white-dominated society that's well known for centuries of discrimination towards whites (which you don't).

I am white and while the phrase taken at its face value is obviously true, I can't think of a context where I could use it without intentional racist subtexts - and that's without even considering the origin of the phrase.

What I have seen is people who aren’t privileged and aren’t successful will hate themselves because they believe they are privileged and because they’re not successful that makes them bad even relative to other similarly unsuccessful people. Poor white boys in Britain have the worst educational outcomes in the country. I’ve heard countless times how affirmative action isn’t a problem because of legacy admissions mostly being held by whites, and it never dawns on people that this means the non-legacy spots for white students must’ve reduced if one is to maintain racial equity (which must of course be done because of centuries of privilege), resulting in a unique problem for people at the intersection of being poor and white which doesn’t happen to poor people in general. Same things happen in the workforce, if you try to achieve equity in a disproportionately white workplace without firing a bunch of white people, think about it, WHICH white people take the hit? Despite what I describe not showing that while people collectively are hard done by, my point is that looking at the collective situation is misleading and underestimates the potential for a white person to get screwed for having the wrong skin BECAUSE of the privilege of other whites!

There is one context in which I will say words to the effect of “it’s okay to be white” which is to counteract the toxic effects of treating whites as a homogenous whole with “white privilege” which can destroy peoples self esteem when they don’t live up to that privilege and think dark things about themselves and people who look like them.

> "It's okay to be white" (IOTBW) is a slogan which originated as part of an organized alt-right trolling campaign on the website 4chan's discussion board /pol/ in 2017.

Countless search results pre-date this and not on 4chan. [0]

[0] https://www.google.com/search?q=%22it%27s+ok+to+be+white%22&...

The other thing to remember is that there's a difference between whether anyone in human history has ever combined 5 words together before and the organized campaign promoting that as a catch-phrase aiming to boost white supremacy. If we find a few neo-Nazis using that phrase before 2017, it doesn't meaningfully change the idea that the reason almost everyone else has heard of it is due to the /pol/ campaign — to call that into question you'd want to see if there was non-racist use prior to that date.

Here's considerably more detail about how they moved that from 4chan to Fox News: https://mediamanipulation.org/case-studies/viral-slogan-its-...