Bye Dilbert

Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert comic strip, is the latest celebrity to have a racist breakdown. He joins a list of others crying victimhood and falling for MAGA values. It seems he's been on this path for a while so it's not surprising. Of course, he's digging in and crying about his freedom of speech being violated. This faux outrage is what they want anyway as it brings attention to their viewpoint. 

The chance that Adams and others like him will repent or change is unlikely. They've made a decision and that's it. I've yet to see much repentance from other celebrities who went this route. A lot of it is the same cries of victimhood and cancel culture. They wonder allowed about no longer being able to get the work they used to, having contracts canceled, and sponsors dropping them. 

What few of them realize is that freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. As  Eugene Robinson said in the Washington Post,

 "...free speech is not the same thing as consequence-free speech. The former is guaranteed by the Constitution. The latter is not.".

 There seems to be a notion of those who speak out against "cancel culture" and think that free speech means the ability to say anything without impunity. Speech by nature is communication that usually has a purpose. It can be to persuade, entertain, share information, or be social. To expect others not to react what is the purpose of sharing it? 

As per the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights: 

"Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 

Who shall make no law or abridge free speech?  Congress. In other words the government restriction or law. A citizen or entity is not restricted in expressing differing views. So to cry out about "freedom of speech" being violated by someone other than a government entity is bogus. When a person or private entity is reacting they are expressing their free speech. 

As I said it's not realistic to expect Scott Adams to change his tune about views but the rest of us who disagree are free to express how we feel about him. For that, we should be thankful.