"It's Just a Joke": When "Humor" Becomes a Weaponized Tool of Extremism

[Heyo]

I also don't see how humor that employs stereotypes about groups that already face numerous social and legal challenges in a lot of countries (e.g., LGBT people) is against the "elite." If anything, a bunch of wealthy comedians cracking these types of jokes on some of the world's most popular platforms (such as Netflix) are quite arguably among the "elite" themselves. They risk nothing of note while sometimes acting like martyrs when they face criticism that doesn't remotely threaten their safety or ability to express themselves legally.

I'm usually not the "free market" guy but in this case, I think, it will work. If jokes don't land, comedians will stop using them.

 

[Wildswanderer]

I wouldn't judge societal trends based on the reactions of people who specifically attend comedy shows. For example:



Also:



Is the snowflake generation really about to kill off comedy?

Make of that what you will, but things are clearly different now than they were in previous decades, and I doubt the changes will stop here.

It looks like i was right.
A small minority complaining about being offended by everything.

 

[Debater Slayer]

In the recent climate it isn't unreasonable to be paranoid. The next step after calling their jokes "dangerous" (which they are or can be), is calling for measures against them. But as long as they don't call for violence, there is reason to monitor them, to call them out and tell them that they aren't funny - but not to silence them.

The article wasn't talking about silencing harmful jokes; it was merely pointing out that humor can be used as a tool to advance and normalize extremist ideology.

 

[Debater Slayer]

It looks like i was right.
A small minority complaining about being offended by everything.

I don't know how you drew that conclusion from the links I posted, but either way, the report in the OP cited examples of extremism propagated by ostensibly humorous material. That's quite different from "complaining about being offended by everything," which is an oversimplification of a complicated issue.

 

[Debater Slayer]

No, this is a scientifically proven fact. "Rightwing comedian" is practically an oxymoron. Punching down isn't funny.

Ideologues can be funny; just not intentionally.

 

[Heyo]

The article wasn't talking about silencing harmful jokes; it was merely pointing out that humor can be used as a tool to advance and normalize extremist ideology.

Oh, so articles can "just point out things" without implying any further action?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Oh, so articles can "just point out things" without implying any further action?

Of course. The Guardian article didn't imply or suggest any action beyond criticism and raising awareness of the issue. If you saw otherwise in any part thereof, feel free to quote it.

 

[Secret Chief]

Ideologues can be funny; just not intentionally.

The problem comes when a target is so absurd they become near impossible to satirise. As good as Alec Baldwin was he seemed essentially to be doing a straightforward impersonation of the orange idiot.

 

[Quintessence]

I learned when I was a kid that there were many different kinds of humor.

One of those kinds of humor was the type that is at someone else's expense.

I never found such "humor" to be funny. Probably because I recognized it for what it was - a cover for petty meanness at best, bigotry at worst.

Humor being used as a cover for meanness isn't new; it's probably as old as human humor. Kids recognizing it for what it is at a young age isn't new either. Some of us internalize that lesson to avoid and shun "humor" at the expense of others. Some of us internalize that lesson to continue the tradition of weaponizing "humor" at the expense of others. So it has been, so it shall continue to be. Act as thou wilt in accord with one's character and sense of virtue. For my part, I'll continue failing to laugh at "humor" that is at someone else's expense and calling it out as hateful rubbish.

 

[Stevicus]

An excellent article on the Guardian from almost six years ago about how some of the most fringe and extremist individuals on the so-called "alt-right" masquerade their rhetoric and propaganda in the form of "humor," allowing them to disseminate their ideology without displaying overt commitment to socially unacceptable views:



Hiding in plain sight: how the 'alt-right' is weaponizing irony to spread fascism

A paper published on the European Commission's website puts forth a similar argument:



Far-right extremists’ use of humour, 2021

I have long held the opinion that "it's just a joke" should not be a carte blanche to say whatever one wants without consideration for the potential harms and consequences. This is especially true for public figures who, inadvertently or not, sometimes play right into the hands of extremists by propagating harmful stereotypes in the form of "comedy."

For instance, last year, Breitbart had a positive article about Ricky Gervais' jokes targeting trans people in one of his specials, which the outlet seemed to consider to be genuine political messaging or social commentary (warning per Rule 5: language in the link).

What are your thoughts? Could ostensible "humor" be used to advance harmful ideologies, or are the above examples just the result of extremists co-opting well-meaning humor and misusing it?

I recall when ethnic humor was far more common and considered more innocuous than anything else. Most of the time, it wasn't to hide any ill intent, although some might have seen it as sophomoric and puerile. But over time, the reaction against it grew, and it became socially unacceptable after a certain point.

It was considered insensitive and offensive, but nobody would have thought that someone was a closet Nazi just because they told a Polish joke. Now, it appears that perception has changed.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I recall when ethnic humor was far more common and considered more innocuous than anything else. Most of the time, it wasn't to hide any ill intent, although some might have seen it as sophomoric and puerile. But over time, the reaction against it grew, and it became socially unacceptable after a certain point.

It was considered insensitive and offensive, but nobody would have thought that someone was a closet Nazi just because they told a Polish joke. Now, it appears that perception has changed.

I think the existence of a seemingly increasingly vocal fringe who make such jokes and are indeed closet or subdued Nazis, or at least ideological extremists of other types, doesn't help. The article cited a report discussing the alt-right, but I have to wonder how many other hateful groups, and in how many countries, use similar methods for the expression and dissemination of their ideologies.

 

[Wildswanderer]

I don't know how you drew that conclusion from the links I posted, but either way, the report in the OP cited examples of extremism propagated by ostensibly humorous material. That's quite different from "complaining about being offended by everything," which is an oversimplification of a complicated issue.

What constitutes extremism is all in the eyes of the beholder.

 

[SomeRandom]

I recall when ethnic humor was far more common and considered more innocuous than anything else. Most of the time, it wasn't to hide any ill intent, although some might have seen it as sophomoric and puerile. But over time, the reaction against it grew, and it became socially unacceptable after a certain point.

It was considered insensitive and offensive, but nobody would have thought that someone was a closet Nazi just because they told a Polish joke. Now, it appears that perception has changed.

I mean, to be fair, I think “insensitive” humour can be done with good intentions. Like an example off the top of my head
On a popular show here during the 80s (I think it was Hey Hey it’s Saturday but I could be wrong) there were a group of performers (locals) who made a lovingly mocking tribute to Micheal Jackson, all dressing up in over the top makeup and yes would be considered blackface today.
This was met with applause and a sort of “oh you guys” kind of attitude at the time.
When the show had a reboot or I think some kind of anniversary special a couple of decades later, they performed the same skit. This time the reaction (particularly because there was a guest host/judge from the US) was one of shock and sort of appalled the audience to an extent. No one really blamed the performers, they were nice blokes perhaps a touch naive.
And indeed Australia doesn’t really have the same cultural history with blackface as the US does. It was only with more international relations that it became understood why it was phased out.

So naivety and good intent can be correlated with offensive or poor taste jokes certainly.
However much like the article in the OP points out, this has been used as a shield and even weaponised by certain far right extremists to push their agenda. Something I think folks are picking up on more and more. Hence more “Nazi” accusations, which might not be inaccurate honestly

 

[Watchmen]

I wonder if the left is willing to look in the mirror and apply the same standards.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I wonder if the left is willing to look in the mirror and apply the same standards.

Yes.

As a matter of fact, I would argue it applies its standards more rigorously - and often with greater impact - to members of its own group than it does to others.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes.

As a matter of fact, I would argue it applies its standards more rigorously - and often with greater impact - to members of its own group than it does to others.

It's a "matter of fact" that you'd argue this?

 

[Aštra’el]

It really doesn’t bother me if I laugh at something that offends you. Control your emotions better.

 

[Revoltingest]

I use humor to advocate for my extreme views.
The morality of it all depends on whether the
extremism is good or evil.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

It's a "matter of fact" that you'd argue this?

Yep.

 

[Debater Slayer]

It really doesn’t bother me if I laugh at something that offends you. Control your emotions better.

The thread topic is a separate subject, which is the use of purported humor to advance extremist ideology. Laughing at such humor or not is a secondary issue.

As for controlling emotions, I think you might benefit from that advice considering the fixation on certain groups (e.g., trans people) that some of your stated positions demonstrate.