"Every authority figure in the show is hypocritical and corrupt, but we get to laugh at them and have fun with it." The thing is, this started out as edgy comedy in the '60s (Lenny Bruce, Peter Cook) and eventually mainstreamed. I have to wonder if by some selection effect it has something to do with the rise of political clown-acts that revel in corruption as opposed to attempting to hide it.
a couple points... first, the website Stuff White People Like had nothing to do with making fun of white people per se - it was about making fun of elitist liberals. The site would sometimes refer to "the wrong type of white person" (meaning not "progressive") just to make it clear.
second, as a Jew, I'm glad you recognized that antisemitism is a real thing. it's all over the place, usually disguised with or blended in with supposed criticism of Israel. it's gotten so much worse lately. it's pushed me much more to the right - I vote GOP now instead of Democrat mainly for that reason, and many other Jews do too.
finally, I just wanted to comment on that cartoon... I actually do think that the cartoon character commenting about Israel killing thousands of Palestinian children is indeed being antisemitic! this may surprise you, it may not, but yes, I do think that's a comment that has echoes of the blood libel and completely ignores the context in which those children were killed (we were fighting Nazis who wanted to commit genocide against us and they hid behind the children).
Sam Harris just wrote a great essay on why he won’t debate critics of Israel and it is for precisely this reason. Of course you can criticize Israel’s conduct in the war, but surely, you must also be critical of the much, much worse horrors, taking place at the same time and since but elsewhere (and by countries who we also “sponsor”). If not, well, your singular focus on Israel might just be because they’re Jews, and, ahem, antisemitic.
Thanks for the tip - that is a great essay. And yes, it's the selective focus on Israel that is antisemitic - the cartoon makes it seem like a joke, but it's not at all.
Yes, I have said the same thing about people with a singular focus on only Israel. Thankfully I'm not that person and don't even bother debating this stuff (and have been yelled at for not doing so by leftists, too) beyond the very obvious fact that simply criticizing the Israeli government isn't inherently antisemitic.
That cartoon is about as tame as it could possibly be in criticizing the actions of a government. You will never, ever convince me that simply criticizing some of the actions of the Israeli government is *inherently* antisemitic, though, sorry. That's patently ridiculous. Obviously actual antisemites will likely criticize Israel; also obviously, not everyone who does has anything against its citizens. The assumption can't even logically be correct.
You are correct, simply criticizing some of the actions of the Israeli government is not inherently antisemitic! For instance, there are Jewish human rights organizations in Israel who do this. Israel is a democracy with a great deal of disagreement so obviously plenty of people in Israel criticize some of the actions of their government.
I don't think anyone has ever claimed that "criticizing some of the actions of the Israeli government is inherently antisemitic" - that appears to be a straw man.
People sometimes use the 3D test, demonization, double standards, and delegitimization, to clarify what antisemitism is.
You're sitting here saying that you don't think anyone has ever claimed that criticizing the actions of the Israeli government is inherently antisemitic, and that that's a straw man. Meanwhile, all I have to do is scroll up to see *you* saying that a cartoon character saying "Israel has killed over 17,000 Palestinian children. That is wrong," is being antisemitic, and that the comment has "echoes of blood libel."
You more or less say that anybody who asserts that killing children en masse (something the Israeli government has done) is wrong is inherently antisemitic and imply that they must paranoically believe in Jews engaging in some kind of secret ritual involving the blood of children, and then turn right around and claim that the idea that anyone is ever accused of being antisemitic for criticizing the actions of the Israeli government is a straw man.
That makes me sad to read. It makes me sad to read hate of any type, really, but especially knowing that people out there are repeating jewhating comments like that hurts.
No, the Israeli government has not "killed children en masse" - and it is indeed antisemitic and an example of the blood libel to say that.
Yes, children sadly died as part of Israel's war against terrorists, just as in every other war that every other country has ever engaged in. It's impossible to conduct urban warfare without killing civilians, including children, but notice how you single Israel out and specifically focus on the kids, without explaining the context. That's the part that is antisemitic.
And it should be clear that there's a huge difference between legitimate, detailed, nuanced criticism of a country's conduct, and someone saying "Israel kills kids" devoid of the context in which that occurred - as though it were deliberately done, unnecessary to the war, or unique to Israel. I hope you can see the difference.
And no, the blood libel does not require anyone believing in some kind of secret ritual. It's simply an antisemitic trope that comes up in many forms.
Really. It boils down to trust, which American society no longer has. Chappelle had people's trust and made all sorts of offensive jokes about everybody. It wasn't him or his routine that changed, it was the audience. We stopped trusting that jokesters were actually joking because it turns out some of them weren't.
At this point, white people jokes take too much meta-sussing to figure out if I'm actually being insulted. They're automatically not funny unless it's coming from a particular friend or comedian. Ditto on men jokes, especially considering that female patrons will make a b-line for female coworkers--I'm a librarian, not construction worker, which means it's also a good bet I'm gay but I must still be avoided. The Left, in general, needs to confront its bigotry but I kinda suspect that won't happen and we'll end up with MAPA (Make America Progressive Again). It's going to be a very unfunny decade as this shit works itself out.
Maybe there’s nuances I’m missing but I don’t see how that “Wandering Jew in the oven” joke isn’t just straight up antisemitic. Is the joke that it’s so antisemitic it was *always* over the line, even before peak woke?
Yes, pretty much. I mean, the sheer absurdity of sincere antisemitic jokes that I explained in the essay combined with how over the top it was was the entire point, and the fact that, if you didn't actually know me you might think I was actually antisemitic, is why I only sent the picture to like 3 people when I took it, because they knew me
That makes more sense; my first reading was more like “can you believe kids these days are so sensitive about racism lol!” and I was like “actually that one seems reasonable.” Which is funny because the backlash to peak woke really did undermine the distinction required to get your joke to land. And now I’m thinking that was your actual joke? Or did I go up one too many levels of meta?
I feel like you could compare it to a "dead baby" joke in a way (which my mom used to tell when I was growing up, which now explains a lot about my sense of humor lol). The whole point is to be shocking and outlandish, but it's not a sincere reflection of the joke-tellers views on the matter
Peak Woke led a lot of people to be dismissive of claims of racism (and other ism & phobias) that they shouldn’t have and probably wouldn’t have 10-15 years ago. Their detectors got miscalibrated, making it difficult to tell the difference between someone who thinks joking about putting Jews into ovens isn’t anything any reasonable person should be offended about and someone pretending to be one of those people for hyperbole’s sake. Basically the Poe’s Law threshold was lowered.
I am reminded of something Trevor Noah explained about comedy. This is a paraphrase, so I may miss a few details. The basic gist of it is that a lot of comedy that set mainstream standards when we were kids started in more controlled environments (such as comedy clubs) where comics could more safely experiment with formats and content. Nowadays, social media removed those guard rails, and people are experimenting everywhere without learning how to read the room. I suspect that change in context has resulted in a lot of what we see in jokes today. The democratization of comedy is (in my opinion) not so great, and we have a lot of people telling jokes without considering the various ways in which comedy does actually have consequences.
"Every authority figure in the show is hypocritical and corrupt, but we get to laugh at them and have fun with it." The thing is, this started out as edgy comedy in the '60s (Lenny Bruce, Peter Cook) and eventually mainstreamed. I have to wonder if by some selection effect it has something to do with the rise of political clown-acts that revel in corruption as opposed to attempting to hide it.
It's hard to laugh at people that aren't even taking what they do seriously while it's so disruptive (understatement).
a couple points... first, the website Stuff White People Like had nothing to do with making fun of white people per se - it was about making fun of elitist liberals. The site would sometimes refer to "the wrong type of white person" (meaning not "progressive") just to make it clear.
second, as a Jew, I'm glad you recognized that antisemitism is a real thing. it's all over the place, usually disguised with or blended in with supposed criticism of Israel. it's gotten so much worse lately. it's pushed me much more to the right - I vote GOP now instead of Democrat mainly for that reason, and many other Jews do too.
finally, I just wanted to comment on that cartoon... I actually do think that the cartoon character commenting about Israel killing thousands of Palestinian children is indeed being antisemitic! this may surprise you, it may not, but yes, I do think that's a comment that has echoes of the blood libel and completely ignores the context in which those children were killed (we were fighting Nazis who wanted to commit genocide against us and they hid behind the children).
Sam Harris just wrote a great essay on why he won’t debate critics of Israel and it is for precisely this reason. Of course you can criticize Israel’s conduct in the war, but surely, you must also be critical of the much, much worse horrors, taking place at the same time and since but elsewhere (and by countries who we also “sponsor”). If not, well, your singular focus on Israel might just be because they’re Jews, and, ahem, antisemitic.
This one, right? https://samharris.substack.com/p/why-i-wont-debate-critics-of-israel
Thanks for the tip - that is a great essay. And yes, it's the selective focus on Israel that is antisemitic - the cartoon makes it seem like a joke, but it's not at all.
Yes, I have said the same thing about people with a singular focus on only Israel. Thankfully I'm not that person and don't even bother debating this stuff (and have been yelled at for not doing so by leftists, too) beyond the very obvious fact that simply criticizing the Israeli government isn't inherently antisemitic.
That cartoon is about as tame as it could possibly be in criticizing the actions of a government. You will never, ever convince me that simply criticizing some of the actions of the Israeli government is *inherently* antisemitic, though, sorry. That's patently ridiculous. Obviously actual antisemites will likely criticize Israel; also obviously, not everyone who does has anything against its citizens. The assumption can't even logically be correct.
You are correct, simply criticizing some of the actions of the Israeli government is not inherently antisemitic! For instance, there are Jewish human rights organizations in Israel who do this. Israel is a democracy with a great deal of disagreement so obviously plenty of people in Israel criticize some of the actions of their government.
I don't think anyone has ever claimed that "criticizing some of the actions of the Israeli government is inherently antisemitic" - that appears to be a straw man.
People sometimes use the 3D test, demonization, double standards, and delegitimization, to clarify what antisemitism is.
https://jcfa.org/article/3d-test-of-anti-semitism-demonization-double-standards-delegitimization/
You're sitting here saying that you don't think anyone has ever claimed that criticizing the actions of the Israeli government is inherently antisemitic, and that that's a straw man. Meanwhile, all I have to do is scroll up to see *you* saying that a cartoon character saying "Israel has killed over 17,000 Palestinian children. That is wrong," is being antisemitic, and that the comment has "echoes of blood libel."
You more or less say that anybody who asserts that killing children en masse (something the Israeli government has done) is wrong is inherently antisemitic and imply that they must paranoically believe in Jews engaging in some kind of secret ritual involving the blood of children, and then turn right around and claim that the idea that anyone is ever accused of being antisemitic for criticizing the actions of the Israeli government is a straw man.
Completely ridiculous.
That makes me sad to read. It makes me sad to read hate of any type, really, but especially knowing that people out there are repeating jewhating comments like that hurts.
No, the Israeli government has not "killed children en masse" - and it is indeed antisemitic and an example of the blood libel to say that.
Yes, children sadly died as part of Israel's war against terrorists, just as in every other war that every other country has ever engaged in. It's impossible to conduct urban warfare without killing civilians, including children, but notice how you single Israel out and specifically focus on the kids, without explaining the context. That's the part that is antisemitic.
And it should be clear that there's a huge difference between legitimate, detailed, nuanced criticism of a country's conduct, and someone saying "Israel kills kids" devoid of the context in which that occurred - as though it were deliberately done, unnecessary to the war, or unique to Israel. I hope you can see the difference.
And no, the blood libel does not require anyone believing in some kind of secret ritual. It's simply an antisemitic trope that comes up in many forms.
Girl ! I wrote my whole book to offend people - get reading and quoting :)
Really. It boils down to trust, which American society no longer has. Chappelle had people's trust and made all sorts of offensive jokes about everybody. It wasn't him or his routine that changed, it was the audience. We stopped trusting that jokesters were actually joking because it turns out some of them weren't.
At this point, white people jokes take too much meta-sussing to figure out if I'm actually being insulted. They're automatically not funny unless it's coming from a particular friend or comedian. Ditto on men jokes, especially considering that female patrons will make a b-line for female coworkers--I'm a librarian, not construction worker, which means it's also a good bet I'm gay but I must still be avoided. The Left, in general, needs to confront its bigotry but I kinda suspect that won't happen and we'll end up with MAPA (Make America Progressive Again). It's going to be a very unfunny decade as this shit works itself out.
Maybe there’s nuances I’m missing but I don’t see how that “Wandering Jew in the oven” joke isn’t just straight up antisemitic. Is the joke that it’s so antisemitic it was *always* over the line, even before peak woke?
Yes, pretty much. I mean, the sheer absurdity of sincere antisemitic jokes that I explained in the essay combined with how over the top it was was the entire point, and the fact that, if you didn't actually know me you might think I was actually antisemitic, is why I only sent the picture to like 3 people when I took it, because they knew me
That makes more sense; my first reading was more like “can you believe kids these days are so sensitive about racism lol!” and I was like “actually that one seems reasonable.” Which is funny because the backlash to peak woke really did undermine the distinction required to get your joke to land. And now I’m thinking that was your actual joke? Or did I go up one too many levels of meta?
I feel like you could compare it to a "dead baby" joke in a way (which my mom used to tell when I was growing up, which now explains a lot about my sense of humor lol). The whole point is to be shocking and outlandish, but it's not a sincere reflection of the joke-tellers views on the matter
Poe's law strikes again. But I'm not sure how it was the backlash to peak woke that undermined the distinction, can you explain?
I'm not sure what you mean?
Greg said "the backlash to peak woke really did undermine the distinction required to get your joke to land." I was asking him what he meant by that.
Peak Woke led a lot of people to be dismissive of claims of racism (and other ism & phobias) that they shouldn’t have and probably wouldn’t have 10-15 years ago. Their detectors got miscalibrated, making it difficult to tell the difference between someone who thinks joking about putting Jews into ovens isn’t anything any reasonable person should be offended about and someone pretending to be one of those people for hyperbole’s sake. Basically the Poe’s Law threshold was lowered.
Yeah, that one doesn't bother me so much because it's so clearly over-the-top and self-aware.
I am reminded of something Trevor Noah explained about comedy. This is a paraphrase, so I may miss a few details. The basic gist of it is that a lot of comedy that set mainstream standards when we were kids started in more controlled environments (such as comedy clubs) where comics could more safely experiment with formats and content. Nowadays, social media removed those guard rails, and people are experimenting everywhere without learning how to read the room. I suspect that change in context has resulted in a lot of what we see in jokes today. The democratization of comedy is (in my opinion) not so great, and we have a lot of people telling jokes without considering the various ways in which comedy does actually have consequences.