America’s Best Political Philosopher?

SEE BELOW (@#%&@ blog software glitch): 

Dilbert today is worth triple its weight in Harvard political philosophers. Scott Adams is no boot-burnisher.

This cartoon cuts to the heart of the fraud of contemporary democracy.

I am amused to hear talk of politicians having mandates when voters had a choice of squirrel abusers or secretary stranglers. 

Amazing that there is far more truth on the comics page than on the editorial pages in this country.  The cartoonists do not waste time genuflecting to the Official Lies, and they do not stay confined within the boundaries of respectable commentary.


29 Responses to America’s Best Political Philosopher?

  1. Ryan Murphy December 23, 2006 at 2:00 pm #


    Or the “Colbert Report” as well.

  2. Jim December 23, 2006 at 2:24 pm #

    Good point.

    The satirists speak far more truth than do the “public intellectuals”….

  3. Lawhobbit December 23, 2006 at 3:03 pm #

    So who ya gonna vote for, Jim – the squirrel abuser or the secretary strangler? Inquiring minds want to know!

  4. Jim December 23, 2006 at 3:31 pm #

    For the record, I have never been one of those “anything with a hole and a heartbeat” kind of rednecks.

    Thus, squirrels don’t fall under the “sheep” political exemption.

  5. Cous Cous December 23, 2006 at 5:58 pm #

    Choosing between squirrel molesters and woman chokers would be a considerable improvement from the current option of a coin flip between two monsters with identical platforms: war, torture, prohibition, the death penalty, the patriot act, and the infinite quantities of inflation and taxation needed to pay for all that evil.

    So to paraphrase Patrick Henry: “Give me a choice between platypus fondlers and wife beaters, or give me death!”

  6. Jim December 23, 2006 at 6:00 pm #

    I reckon you’re not a big supporter of “squirrel rights.”

  7. makalvy December 23, 2006 at 8:28 pm #

    The cartoon is apropos. We think we have freedom, by virtue of democracy, the right to vote, but what is so great about a “party” system with two candidates in the information age? Voter turnout amply demonstrates that our political system ignores or alienates a good chunk of its citizens. A system that doesn’t excite people isn’t representative – imagine how Americans must have talked about their country after the Rev. War, WWI, WWII: they were filled with pride. Now, some still profess to love America, but they rest their case on freedom. What freedom? Freedom to buy inferior products at Big K, or inferior food at McDs? Face it, America, we are witnessing the collapse of an empire, our own – you might not be able to tell yet, but it’s true. Our guiding value (“everything has its price”) is doomed, and so are we. A new value is replacing it, and it sounds a lot like the old “majority rules” theme from early democracy – “accommodate the majority”. By the time our politicians realize who they’re leaving out of the political dialog, it may be too late. Jim, you’re right about the mandate farce – let’s count what percent of the “potential” voters picked a certain candidate and make them get above a certain goal before they can make decisions (about spending money and going to war, for instance) and get paid. How about that? How’d that be for ya, W?

  8. Tom Blanton December 23, 2006 at 11:48 pm #

    To further my pursuit of a high-paying career on Clear Channel Radio, let me say this:

    This pathetic attempt to discredit the political system of the world’s greatest nation by scott Adams demonstrates the festering danger from within that will embolden the terrorists that seek to take control of America.

    Obviously, it is time to reinterpret the First Amendment when cartoons such as this appear. Faced with the prospect of losing our precious democracy to Osama bin Laden, we can’t allow seditious cartooning during this time of war. We must remember that the Constitution is not a suicide pact. This Dilbert cartoon would be treasonous if it had been drawn on foreign soil.

    If Americans were sufficiently aware of the threat Islam-O-Facsim poses, they would be rioting in the streets over this cartoon.

    If Scott Adams hates America so much, he can always move to France where there is no freedom and the Islam-O-Fascists have already taken the Christ out of X-Mas.

    Now, admit it. This is better stuff than Glenn Beck can come up with – and I’ll work for half of what he makes.

  9. iraqvet December 23, 2006 at 11:48 pm #

    Apparently some folks have not heard of third parties. While they may not win any time soon, they do offer another alternative to simply not voting or voting for the lesser of two evils.

    The lesser of two weevils is still a weevil.

  10. Saturdaynightspecial December 24, 2006 at 12:22 am #

    Consider this: our problem is due to the failure of libertarians to compete with the mass media and spread their message (and expose socialists.)

    Libertarians must determine a way to get air time; either buy and build their own tvnews transmitter or a web or satellite broadcast. Consider the NRA’s daily news broadcast.

    The underground media is spreading ideas but this is not enough.

  11. Ross Nelson December 24, 2006 at 2:51 am #

    Adams makes a great point in the Dilbert comic, but does he have to do it by talking about buggering squirrels?

  12. Jim December 24, 2006 at 8:29 am #

    Are you opposed to the buggering or to the abuse of squirrels?

  13. Jim December 24, 2006 at 8:32 am #

    Tom – If Newt Gingrich sees your comment, he’ll hire you on the spot.

    Or maybe you would need to flap your arms a bit in praise of Lincoln, FDR, and Mussolini in order to become part of the Gingrich Brain Trust.

  14. Kirk A. Hayes December 24, 2006 at 9:51 am #

    Good Morning, Jim –

    The cartoon portrays the ILLUSION of having a real choice to vote for, just as most amerikans have the ILLUSION of freedom. From this perspective, it is right on.

    There are two principles that all should follow in voting in the name of freedom:

    1. NEVER vote for an incumbent;

    2. NEVER vote for an elephant or a jackass.

    Kirk A. Hayes

  15. Jim December 24, 2006 at 10:19 am #

    Kirk, I hope you hoping to get hired as a high school civics teacher any time soon.

  16. makalvy December 24, 2006 at 10:47 am #

    Most people are either Republicans or Democrats. If, as in the last election, they are fed up with one party they switch. I’m not clear on the history of it, but I believe that a third party needs publicity to have any chance of winning seats or having influence. What is the point of voting Bovard if only people who have read his books will choose him? You need big bucks to run an effective campaign – those holding those big bucks vote for the status quo.

  17. BobCat December 24, 2006 at 11:32 am #

    Voting is what an uninformed jury is: window dressing for the empire! Just as “judges” tell the jury what the law is, our “betters” in the political parties give us two phonies to choose from. The constitution is supposed to limit the feds. But no one enforces it. If the people hadn’t been so “dumbed down” they would have reclaimed their right through the JURY! But, alas, don’t hold your breath. The elites rule by appealing to the morons.

  18. Jim December 24, 2006 at 11:34 am #

    Makalvy – what is this “voting Bovard” stuff?

    I ain’t running for nothing.

    Nowadays, being nominated is half way to being indicted.

  19. makalvy December 24, 2006 at 11:45 am #

    I thought you would make a good write-in candidate.

  20. Jim December 24, 2006 at 11:50 am #

    Those French names can be tricky to spell.

    Actually, the new electronic voting systems here in Maryland make it far more difficult to write in the names of candidates not officially ordained by the Establishment. Jim Lesczynski, the former chief of the Manhattan Libertarian Party, did a clever test of the system this year and found that write-in candidates were routinely never counted in New York City voting.

  21. makalvy December 24, 2006 at 1:48 pm #

    That just goes to show that we have (effectively) a two party system. Someone elsewhere on this blog said that the Dems and Repubs are too close together, that the problem is not that they don’t get along. Libertarians have a long way to go.

  22. Marty December 24, 2006 at 2:00 pm #

    Amazingly, I hear no mention of the gargantuan pollution generated by the U.S. military from the mouths of global warming alarmists. Here’s just one example: in FY2003, the U.S. Air Force consumed 3.5 billion gallons of fuel, much of it in the stratosphere.

  23. Adam S. December 24, 2006 at 3:12 pm #

    I believe that cartoonists are canaries in the political coal mine. We need not put too much stock in them beyond finding a perfect expression of our momentary sentiments. Actually, some of the current generation of cartoonists, like Clay Bennett, produce outstanding pieces of satire. The trouble is not lack of talent or money to be made, but rather, as always, leadership that is unwilling to take risks and a viewing audience that refuses to be offended. (Take for example Tony Ridder.)

  24. Jim December 24, 2006 at 3:40 pm #

    Excellent points.

    Clay Bennett is a great talent – he did a wonderful illustration for my first piece on the Patriot Act, published by Playboy in early 2002.

  25. Adam S. December 24, 2006 at 3:44 pm #

    I think that Mr. Bovard should run with Pat Buchanan for VP/Pres., respectively, in ’08. This way we can possibly shock everyone into voting, offending every single mainstream sensibility. Candidates seem so indistinct anymore.
    Speaking of cartoons as potent political weapons, the show “Futurama” made fun of the 2000 elections brilliantly. The election was between two clones, Jack Johnson and John Jackson, who were each “against those things that everybody hates” and disagreed with each other over the fact that the titanium tax “[went] to far” versus “not going too far enough” Sometimes art imitates life too well.

  26. makalvy December 24, 2006 at 4:26 pm #

    I checked the stats and it would appear that in FY2003, the domestic fuel consumption was well over 100 billion gallons (3 trillion highway miles, most of it passenger cars).

  27. Woolf-Larsen December 25, 2006 at 1:28 pm #

    The US is a two-in-one-party dictatorship.

  28. Scott December 26, 2006 at 3:30 pm #

    The terrible truth of the matter is Democracy in it’s current format is simply the uninformed attempting to choose between the corrupt and the successfully corrupt, if they bother voting at all that is.
    I’d vote for the Squirrel Lover myself, I mean come on people they are pretty cute.
    Long live Dilbert

  29. Jim December 26, 2006 at 8:58 pm #

    I suspect this thread of comments is getting perilously close to the tripwire alarm for the Squirrel Anti-Defamation League.