For comedians around the world, the laughs often end as democracy fades | Hacker News Reader

For comedians around the world, the laughs often end as democracy fades

theguardian.com

90 pointsthunderbong72 comments

This will probably not live long on hacker news because people here are basically distracting themselves from the constant barrage of American politics, but it’s pretty clear this regime doesn’t care about the first amendment.

The problem with extreme polarization in a 2 party system is that each party doesn’t police itself, doesn’t rein itself in, and when the other finally gets back in power, it pushes through awful retaliatory measures. The 2 parties are happy with this state of affairs because they’re pretty much guaranteed 50% of the time to be the one in power, in control. Vote 3rd party to break this cycle

The way voting in the US works, voting 3rd party has the same real effect as not voting at all.

If you want to build a third party, you have to start at the bottom, with local races, and work your way up. You can't do it starting with national races.

I think you have to start lower than that, with the voting system itself. I've seen it argued in several places that "first past the post" leads to only two parties.

Yes, I mean in all elections not just for president.

Votes do matter. What if Kamala had gotten no votes at all, would that be the same real effect? Yes and no

> Vote 3rd party to break this cycle

Will that break the cycle? Power corrupts, and attracts the corrupt. After a 3rd party attains power, it will become as corrupt as the other two.

The reason that 3rd parties look better right now is precisely because they have no power or money.

I’m not saying many parties would fix human nature I’m saying it would break this specific cycle

Hard to break the cycle with the broken first-past-the-post voting system.

That Trump tweeted after Colbert's show was not-renewed that Kimmel would be next - and then gets Kimmel cancelled, said to reporters that licensed broadcasters aren't "allowed" to criticize him, and tweeted after Kimmel that Seth Meyers would be next - and yet still has the support of a majority of republicans, astounds me.

There is no authoritarian line he can cross that turns away his apologists. They pretend that Biden or Obama were somehow worse (which, even if true, is an illogical argument for democratic norms), pretend that these are private decisions not coerced by the state power, or cheer for "retribution" against their idealogical opponents while embracing a diminishing of democratic freedoms. They have no red lines for Trump. He can deny established science; deny access to life saving vaccines; control the media; accept billions in personal investments from foreign governments in return for US policy; kill people in international waters without oversight... that's just this month's list!

It's not a phenomena I could have truly internalized without experiencing it first hand. It has changed me even as a late-middled-aged adult. I wonder what it must be like for those younger, who are assembling the foundations of their political and social opinions.

I have been completely radicalized. I used to be a boring moderate; was a liberal when it came to social issues, but somewhat conservative fiscally. Now I find I am just an American, and it is no longer about left or right, it is about what is moral and immoral. I never would have believed so many in my country would have zero self-reflection and ignorance, but here we are. I suppose they have always been here, I just did not want to believe it.

The left and right have more in common with each other than they realise. Many of the distinctions become irrelevant when you realise it's really workers against the power of massive capital.

>Many of the distinctions become irrelevant when you realise it's really workers against the power of massive capital.

If you're talking about the two parties, Democrats and Republicans, then sure. But that's mostly because the Democrats are only nominally "leftist." Both parties are pro police, pro military industrial complex, pro Zionism, and pro capital. Both support the American white supremacist imperialist order. It isn't left and right where American power structures are concerned, it's center-right and far-right.

But the distinction on the ground, with real people, is definitional and couldn't be more distinct in that the left recognizes class struggle and sides with the workers, while the right recognizes class struggle and sides with capital. The dissonance between the left and the Democrats versus the harmony between the right and Republicans is why the Democrats keep losing elections - between the two camps only Trump and the Republicans are actually giving their constituents what they voted for.

It's truly gut wrenching what has happened to the Republican party. The people who seriously warned against Trump are either out, or have done a complete 180 and are now licking his boots.

See the documentary film "Tickling Giants" about Egyptian comedian Bassem Youssef.

Is that the dude the knowing he was lying tried to push the narrative that Israel killed Charlie Kirk purely to try and sour the Right's opinion of Israel?

Any proof that he knew he was lying / that he was lying ?

I see him as "the dude" that did the best interview on the whole ongoing israeli slaughter with piers morgan (part 1 and 2) using actual facts...

I think he said as a comedian, he was joking.

Fun fact: free speech never existed in the US. In the 50s, one had the right to proclaim oneself a nazi, but bearing a communist card meant the State Dept could suspend your passport anytime.

Kimmel and Colbert both illustrate a big problem. The Trump regime didn't have to arrest Colbert or throw Kimmel in prison, or turn up with troops and dismantle their studios - some faceless executive who is about as funny as cancer made a decision to bow to Trump because it was at least temporarily in their interest and the consequences flow from there.

Satire needs independent grass roots funding. If the satirist you love costs $10M per year, well, people who love satire better be putting $10M per year on the table to pay for that, because if it's just (for example) a Disney product then to Disney $10M of satire which annoys the God Emperor is a bad deal, lets buy $10M of police procedural or whatever instead.

To be clear: It is very possible that an independently funded satirist just means in six months or six years God Emperor Trump decides he's entitled to shut that down and they do get arrested or whatever, this is not a magic solution, but I think a critical weakness in the US is that so much of this is actually funded by giant corporations and thus psychopaths. It's choosing to fight with one arm tied behind your back.

Or it's like having one of your arms intentionally tied behind your back by a long running conspiracy to place all media in the hands of, at best, faceless corporate bean counters who are amenable at the merest hint of a threat, or worse, active regime loyalists?

There's a popular aphorism (awkwardly translated French -> German -> English) that I hate:

"Laughter is a power that even the world's most powerful figures must bow down to"

...is that so, after all?!

I think it is wrong for Kimmel to be silenced, as wrong as it was for the Biden administration to encourage social media platforms to silence candidate Donald Trump.

Now that we are here, we need bipartisan cool heads to establish good rules.

Just because someone is a comedian doesn't mean everything they say is a joke. If Kimmel's comment on Monday were a joke,m someone needs to explain it to me, because I didn't get it.

What I did hear was some "facts" that did not seem to line up with things I heard in the news. I just assumed he ignored his staff of "fact checkers" -- see Kimmel's comments when he had the dust up with Aaron Rogers -- and was just on another of his anti-Trump rants.

While his show isn't all that bad, his monologues are political and have gotten old. Stick to jokes.

> What I did hear was some "facts" that did not seem to line up with things I heard in the news.

Perhaps this should encourage you to look inward and acknowledge the “news” you listen to is interested in something other than facts.

Everything Kimmel said was factually true.

If you would like to quote the part you are struggling with, and include an explanation about why you feel his statement lacks truth, I can point you to supporting sources.

Kimmel said that Trump fans were trying to distance themselves from the shooter... that is a fact. Could you please share what you mean?

edit to add: also, saying a lie isn't a reason to have FCC license taken away. see: Fox News.

I agree with your points, I point out for edification that broadcast licenses that regulate use of the EM spectrum don't apply to cable news networks such as the Fox News Channel (FNC) - the terms and conditions differ; things can be legally 'broadcast' on cable channels that are illegal to broadcast on a TV spectrum channel.

No drama, it's just not a "see: example" you should use in discussions such as this.

Interesting, thanks.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com