Hacker News Reader

Comment by karlgkk | Hacker News Reader

Often when someone, especially a comedian, complains about “political correctness”, what they actually mean is: nobody is laughing at the same joke I told 20 years ago

Sensibilities change. The sense of what is and isn’t punching down changes. Even the appetite for punching down changes.

People who whine about “PC” always pretend like it’s the death of comedy or speech or whatever, and yet… there are younger people building great careers!

And yes, there is a real worrying erosion of free speech - but 98% these people could keep saying exactly what they’ve been saying - they’re just not getting the laughs they think they’re entitled to.

View on HN

> Sensibilities change. The sense of what is and isn’t punching down changes. Even the appetite for punching down changes.

Yes, and the way it changes tells us something about our society, which I believe this article is trying to address.

Read the article, its much more interesting and reflective that that

I did, I’m just commenting one facet

> Sensibilities change

If people are literally calling the police, they aren't changing, they are being suppressed/punished.

> they’re just not getting the laughs they think they’re entitled to

Why are the comedians 'entitled' rather than the people who go to their show and complain?

It’s not zero sum. Expand your thinking lol

Maybe expand your comment so I know what you're thinking, "lol"

Maybe don’t make up something in your head and then get mad at me for it, lol

> Often when someone, especially a comedian, complains about “political correctness”, what they actually mean is: nobody is laughing at the same joke I told 20 years ago

Don't rephrase others' sentiments to suit your own narrative. Soothsayers are bullshitters.

When comedians complain about political correctness, there is no alternate meaning. They are upset that they can't tell the same jokes they told 20 years ago, to the same audiences from 20 years ago that continue to enjoy them, because external forces mob, heckle, and harass them so they cannot serve their customers...

...which conveniently provides opportunities for those younger people to "build great careers," by eliminating all legacy competition.

In any other context it'd be driving the local kebab shop owner out of town because someone with influence wants to open a salad bar in its place.

It's mob rule, not "social justice."

Mob rule is when people don't like my comedy any more. Got it.

> Got it.

No you haven't, and it seems you don't care to.

>mob rule

Unless there's some kind of threat of physical force involved it's not. It's just a critical mass of people having opinions you don't like and voicing those opinions.

If the market of ideas decides your ideas are not valuable anymore for whatever reason you're going to suffer what scarcity feels like.

> Unless there's some kind of threat of physical force involved

Last time I checked the mob called for these people lives to be destroyed by asking for them to lose all possibility of ever having a job and threatening anyone who would employ them or support them of dire repercussions while slapping themselves in the back for what a positive impact they made.

So yes, it’s very much about threat of violence.

Is it violence?

describes something non violent

This is violence!

Getting someone's home foreclosed is just SWATing them in slow-motion.

Putting pressure on people in order to destroy someone life definitely is violence, yes, especially considering the point is preventing someone from having the capacity to have a livelihood. Pushed to its logical conclusion, if it worked perfectly, it's more or less murder (or ostrasism if you want to be nice but as some vocal opponents are openly implying murder would be okay I feel founded in saying it is murder).

Violence is not limited to physical violence. The fact that this apparently eludes some is probably the most worrying part of the current American trend and I think in no small part responsible for the sorry state of the country.

The fact is that many people actually follow through on their desire to boycott something, to the point that it’s not a trivial branch of the population.

Taken in the fullness of its meaning, it very much shows that peoples positions and sentiments have changed.

Should we be proud that a non trivial branch of the population is apparently wedging their power to silence another part who would like to say things they don't like?

Personnaly, that doesn't sound very healthy to me.

I mean, no one cared when the shoe was on the foot. America has an information system that has one section that disconnected its viewers from other views. For decades now.

“Mob rule” is just how conservatives say “I shouldn’t face consequences”. Freedom doesn’t include freedom from repercussions

Except of course, it really shouldn’t be funny according to anybody the sole fact that somebody is gay. About what most of these “comedians” arguing for. Even according to the massive amount of disinformation in this topic.

I don’t know why the author included that in the article when the distaste for self-loathing humour can have completely different causes. And also can be quite good reasons, like you cannot really do anything against those, not against the bad environment into which you’re born, and also not against being gay. But that would be against the fabricated outrage, which is enjoyed by many. Probably even by the author.

Just to mention one example that these can have reasons not suggested by disinformation (because for example, it would be against their sources): in Hungary, joking about corruption is dead. Completely. The reason is twofold: Orban stole about 30% of the whole economy in the past 15 years, and that doesn’t include the stolen cash. Also people who care, couldn’t do anything, even when some of us tried. It’s like being gay (in this context), it’s totally out of your control, and there is no chance to change it in any way. Now that I moved to somewhere with healthier democracy, I’m quite happy that I see jokes about corruption again.

comedians no longer complain about that, contemporary comedy is merely repeating the commonly accepted societal mantrae, and laughing at and trivialising opposition or criticism to or of it.

Wit, satire, and criticism are still funny, but aren't permissible.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com