He also has (semi) regular one on one correspondence with moldbug (who is nrx not altright but still). [Source:](https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=4450) > Regulars might remember that Yarvin argued with me in Shtetl-Optimized‘s comment section, under a post in which I denounced Trump’s travel ban and its effects on my Iranian PhD student. Since then, Yarvin has sent me many emails, which have ranged from long to extremely long ... To be fair, Scott doesn't mention he replies to them here. (Which would be funny tbh, moldbug constantly sending novel lenght emails to Scott who just does /dev/null).

Scott Adams, creator of Dilbert, and breaker of minds (esp his own, he hypnotized himself into believing he is a master persuader).

He's not a direct supporter of Mussolini's or Hitler's ideology, no. He still believes in a ton of bullshit about 'human nature' and 'genetics' that gives a lot of intellectual ground to actual modern day fascists

I'd say he's more crypro-HBD, but close enough.

No, but he is [the missing link between neoliberalism and the far right](https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/steven-pinker-jordan-peterson-neoliberalism-radical-right/)

I don't think so, but he is very good [at making stupid statements which make people mad](https://twitter.com/megandfigueroa/status/1268542302542352384), somehow it always involves downplaying leftwing/progressive concerns. (The first time I personally ever heard about him was when I read an article he wrote about something technology related, which was imho so bad I never took him seriously, so I'm biassed).

*chad gamer voice* **Yes.**

https://reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/95tlye/scott_aaronson_gets_arrested_by_the_police/

He stole from a tip jar by accident and wasn't shot by the cops who arrested him, nor was he put in jail.

I don't know how bad it is tbh. I find it personally very hard to talk people who are either apathetic, rightwing, or even the dutch version of leftwing while being racist (The black pete discussion is nuts (and racist), and turns so many otherwise antiracist people into racist spouting people) From what I can tell from listening to black people they certainly don't like it when you re-frame the issue to police violence in general. Because that can lead to stuff like the weed legalisation, in places where weed is now legal a lot of white people owned weed shops show up, but there are still a lot of people in jail for weed related offenses who will not be freed (which hurts non-white people more). But if the tactic at least helps them understand the problem a little bit I personally think it is good, as it at least drives people a little bit more left. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good and all that. But then I again I also really suck at convincing people myself, so hope others can help. E: perhaps if people want we could list a few common RW talking points, and rebuttals. Here are two I noticed. For one, I see people talk about how important the police are to stop violent crime. Important to note is that only 5% of crime involves violent crime and only 1% involves murder. (And of the murders 40% go unsolved) So all this cops protecting against violent crimes is a vast overreaction from the cops. I also see people go 'but only X (low amount) of unarmed black people get killed by the cops each year', to which you can say that the cops are incentivize to plant evidence (and they do, see cops planting drugs), and that even plastic fake guns on 8 year olds counted as armed black people. And then there is the fact that every day at least one cop is arrested themselves.

No, I would say it would not be a bad thing to "center" white people by emphasizing how the mechanisms of repressions fuck them over. In fact, that's arguably a reason why american whites do not resist the state more - they feel it represents them well and won't fuck them over. There have been posts by white nationalists for example who lament how 'their' side hasn't been pushed to the point of burning american flags in public in disavowing the regime as they feel they can still 'keep' it.

Well the thing is that a lot of people are selfish, so a problem that is specific to black people, and they aren't black, they do not care about it, and they can not be made to care about it unless you convince them their skin color can magically turn black. Worse, they are actively *in favor* of problems that can not affect themselves, because that improves their relative stance in the society. So telling them that police brutality is a problem disproportionally affecting black people simply makes them support police brutality more. Simple as that. Ultimately they're just in favor of any kind of shittiness that they don't think can affect them, and the skin color is convenient for that purpose. Without skin color they'd have to go around yelling PAPIERE!!! SCHNELL!!! at people, which also works perfectly fine for right wing people, but is less convenient.