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

[Debater Slayer]

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

Do you think alt-right ideology as described by the links in the OP is "good" or "evil" extremism, then?

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you think alt-right ideology as described by the links in the OP is "good" or "evil" extremism, then?

They are in the evil category (IMO).
Socialist extremists are evil too.
My own extremism is good.
What's yours?

 

[Debater Slayer]

They are in the evil category (IMO).
Socialist extremists are evil too.
My own extremism is good.
What's yours?

My "extremism" would be in the eyes of certain beholders. I strive not to be an extremist insofar as I consider "extremism" to be excessive zeal by default.

 

[Revoltingest]

My "extremism" would be in the eyes of certain beholders. I strive not to be an extremist insofar as I consider "extremism" to be excessive zeal by default.

"Extremism" needn't be about zeal.
It can refer to being at the far end
of a spectrum of beliefs or values.
"Overzealousness", "dogmatism",
"obsession", & "fanaticism" would be
better words for what you described.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

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?

The type of 'humour' discussed in the article is more around internet meme culture, and racist symbology, where trolls contribute to creating an ecosystem that ends up encouraging the sort of actual far right extremism they are mostly aping initially.
That seems a different consideration to a comedian like Gervais. Whilst I tend to fall on the side of free speech, I don't advocate for unfettered free speech. But to me these don't appear like the same things.

In terms of your larger point, of course comedy can be used to advance harmful ideologies. The obvious next question is 'What next, then?'

There is nothing unique about humour in advancing these...music, art, or any form of communication (including symbology based on the linked article) can also be used for this purpose.

 

[Revoltingest]

The type of 'humour' discussed in the article is more around internet meme culture, and racist symbology, where trolls contribute to creating an ecosystem that ends up encouraging the sort of actual far right extremism they are mostly aping initially.
That seems a different consideration to a comedian like Gervais. Whilst I tend to fall on the side of free speech, I don't advocate for unfettered free speech. But to me these don't appear like the same things.

In terms of your larger point, of course comedy can be used to advance harmful ideologies. The obvious next question is 'What next, then?'

There is nothing unique about humour in advancing these...music, art, or any form of communication (including symbology based on the linked article) can also be used for this purpose.

It reminds me of something Homer Simpson once said...
"I hate those people who use words to say things."

 

[Ponder This]

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?

People who worry about extremists taking over comedy, should probably learn to make better jokes.