The Satire Argument

Satire, according to Merriam-Webster dictionary, is a way of using humor to show that someone or something is foolish, weak, bad, etc. It is humor that shows the weaknesses or bad qualities of a person, government, society, etc. Satire is usually used as motivations or plot devices for stories in literary and film media, mostly used to get a few laughs in and to make people think and talk at the same time.

When satire misses it mark in any narrative, intentional or purposeful, and becomes neither funny nor thought-provoking, it shows up as an insult that mostly only privileged people fun hilarious. The satire argument is when people defend such offensive jokes in the mainstream, claiming it be “just satire”.

The American mainstream media factory continuously manufactures and distributes entertainment in the name of satire. The only concern is that most of the factory workers, and their bosses, are straight white males from the left. As such, most mainstream comedies are modeled for their amusement. What we find out there when we go to the movies or turn on the TV are stories and sketches that are supposed to mock society’s isms and phobias. However, a good chuck of those turn being part of the “other” into a punchline that seems never get old.

Take Seth MacFarlane’s animation empire on Fox. He has made a fortune in producing three animated sitcoms: Family Guy, American Dad and The Cleveland Show. All three shows are among Fox’s most popular programs. And all three rely heavily on MacFarlane’s brand of dark, blue-collar humor of fart jokes. gruesome violence and cutaway gags.

However, most of MacFarlane’s projects never tire on using white liberal humor that makes fun of anyone that is not straight, white and male. While some may argue that the real target for ridicule is aimed at American society, especially how white people think and act, the laughs are mostly aimed towards those who fit outside that exclusive box for straight, white American males only. Beyond that are jokes about women, people of color, foreigners, non-Christians and gays o’plenty.

Recently on Twitter, we saw Stephen Colbert of Comedy Central’s The Colbert Report tried to poke fun at the current controversy surrounding Dan Snyder, owner of the Washington Redskins and his creation a foundation for Native Americans while still maintaining the name for his football team. But Colbert’s attempt at satire took a wrong turn when he tweeted about creating a foundation for Asian Americans called the “Ching-Chong Ding-Dong Foundation for Sensitivity to Orientals or Whatever.” Activist Suey Park caught wind of this, and a firestorm was ignited by the hashtag #cancelcolbert.

Stephen Colbert and the tweet that started it all

The controversy surrounding Colbert, Park and skit and tweets inbetween has still being debated with people talking sides on who’s the most wrong. Some will say that all parties involved got it wrong. But this attempt of satire, no matter how screwed up it is, has definitely got people talking, especially with how to approach social issues with a sense of humor.

Satire is hard to achieve, and without a doubt, you have to be clever as hell to get people laughing and thinking at the same time. It can’t simply be dismissed as “just” satire. White liberals in mainstream circuits use racism as a punchline for their comedy routines. But can bringing laughter to society’s problems really spark any hope of change? Is it supposed to invoke change? On the contrary, it seems to help desensitize an already insensitive public. And that’s no laughing matter.

Advertisements

34 thoughts on “The Satire Argument

  1. George Carlin was great at satire that is very true. But in my opinion. The stuff Stephen Colbert does it seems is at the expense of non white people. I could be wrong in my labeling of this but it seems like some kind of l white liberal hipster shit. Am I wrong? I

    1. HELL NO! Colbert is just another liberal hipster racist little punk hiding his bigotry behind so-called humor you are right on the money Mary.

  2. They can dish it out but when people of color call them out on their crap they get angry for being called racist. I have learned that they hate that word, they react to the word racist like you disrespected their mother.

  3. Great post Brotha Wolf! I agree with many of your comments.

    I’m not surprised in the slightest though. Whites have been using people of colour for comic relief for decades (minstrel shows anyone?), not to mention for the pathetic ego boost they gain from degrading us.

    It’s so old.

  4. Folks, if they are ‘satirizing’ one group of people, do you not think they are doing so when your group is not around? Even if they ‘like’ or don’t ‘mind’ your group, they feel no compunctions in insulting black people with the shows people ‘love’ so much. How about the movies with magical Negroes themes? These are subtle forms of satire folks. The joke is on those who don not see this for what it is.

  5. “I think I’ll call it privileged satire.”. I wish we could make this trend, as a way of describing things like The Onion calling a child an inappropriate name.

    #priviligedsatire

  6. Of course a lot of people[mostly white] are defending Colbert saying that he didn’t even write the tweet and he was just mocking Dan Synder’s original racism. Funny how those get over it folks felt the incessant need to bitch like bitches about black comedians saying negative things about white people without ever ONCE acknowledging that it was more Karma than anything else. And God FORBID a white male come under fire without a black face being thrown under the bus by the very hypocrites to arrogant to notice the part they play in black comedians hating on them

      1. This outta be a good one considering the wacko I’m dealing with in another post with the same conclusion.

        He seems to think that calling me a ‘racist’ will make me retract all the insults lobbed at him! I couldn’t give a rat’s ass what he thinks! He provides entertainment as he means what he says? In any case, this goof and his ilk seem to think raising the level of the word racist to that of the n-word will ‘scare’ black folk off. This man is obtuse and ignorant (in the true dictionary sense, not the colloquial one). He types reams of bullshit which most do not bother reading past the first two sentences. I posit that the label ‘racist’ when lobbed at whites is the new ‘black’. When the term is used to describe a black person, it is just another way of calling them a n*gger. Racist whites, whatever their political bent will try to throw this term at blacks who are not good white behind kissing Negroes who laud their whiteness. I have this to say to our friend; kiss my black behind!

  7. It amazes me that people want to be free with their racism but do not want to be called racists. It’s like a 45-year old man saying that he enjoys having sex with children, but does not want to be called a pedophile. Or a man having sex with other men, but does not want to be called gay.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s