One of my favorite podcasts is this psychoanalysis and film series called “Why Theory.” The show is hosted by professors Todd McGowan and Ryan Engley and they break down different psychoanalytical and philosophical concepts using film, tv and other cultural phenomena.
In a part of their discussion in the latest episode “Hegel and Feminism,” Ryan said “It is in the position of the Right to never, ever, be in the critique they are making…They’re never included in the problems they are trying to solve.” I thought that was one of the most spot-on summations I’ve ever heard. Though the following essay may seem tangential, that insight gave me language to articulate some things I’ve thought about the Right, particularly towards how the Right and reactionaries view comedy.
How often do you hear rightwing or reactionary comedians make self-deprecating jokes?
Ironically, Trump is one of the only rightwing figures that does this, like how he jokes about his “beautiful body.” But just about everyone else is basically “libs are stupid/ugly/gross.” If you don’t agree, explain to me what is funny about the different versions of “I identify as a (blank)” joke? What is funny about calling Puerto Rico a floating pile of garbage? What is the comedy in saying “I’m going to say the thing they don’t want me to say” in a Netflix special watched by millions of people? I get that all of these things have an inherent message, but in essence, what is the joke?
Self-deprecation is certainly not a prerequisite for a joke to be funny. All of us have probably laughed at a fart joke, laughed involuntarily at someone slipping and falling, or laughed at a celebrity roast. All of us experience that douchey phase of childhood where you laughed at the misfortune of others. But what does it say about a person, an ideology, that cannot make fun of itself?
The Left and others typically describe comedy on the Right as “punching down” but a more apt description might be “punching out.”
The best comedy always has some element of “punching in” — self-criticism that hurts because the self-reflection was in good faith. This is why many of the best comedians in history have a contemporaneously liberal bent to them — liberal not in the sense that they are on the Left, progressive or vote for Democrats, but that they are more open and willing to be vulnerable to the internal contradictions of the Self, its ideology and how these things interact with our crazy, chaotic but beautiful world; how we are in a constant battle between freeing and undermining ourselves.
All ideologies have their insights, blind-spots, heuristics, schemas, etc. None of them can give us all the answers and all of them avoid recognizing itself in the problems of a society. But I think the Right is unique in that it has a heroic, defensive gaze. It solves its cognitive dissonance in ways that ultimately amount to punching out at the Other. It seems unwilling, maybe incapable, of noticing the subtle contradiction hidden in the idea of a “defensive punch.” But how could they?— defense is the ultimate moral justification.
“You just don’t like conservative comedy because you’re a liberal!” is more than enough justification for any critic reading this to dismiss every argument given here. I can only say that I do think one can be funny and be a conservative. Some of the biggest comedians, late night talk shows, popular podcasts, etc. are done by reactionaries, and have audiences that dwarf most things coming from the Left. And on some level, if someone laughs at your joke, it was funny. Period.
My distaste for reactionary comedy is because the “jokes” aren’t really jokes — they are something more akin to a ritualistic schadenfreude; a catharsis you get from, at best, punching a punching bag, or at worst, punching someone while two of your friends hold their arms behind their back. They are expansions of the Self that push Others out of the room. They are iterations of Nelson from the Simpsons yelling “Ha Ha!” They are the rebellion of those in power who think they are the victims here.
So much of the rhetoric that comes from reactionaries has the explicit goal of beating the empathy out of you. Don’t look at the Them as a potential Us. Don’t think about why your enemy does the things it does. Be cruel because your enemy is cruel. Pick up your sword, find the part of you that wants to put the sword down, and kill it.
I don’t like reactionary comedians because I will always be suspicious of people, politicians, and ideas that can’t see the imperative to self-deprecate. All of us like to have a positive self-image and all of us tell ourselves a grand teleological story about our lives, character, and goodness as a person. But critique is a prerequisite for growth. You can’t fix your hair if you don’t look in the mirror. You can’t atone for your sins if you can’t first conceive of them as sins.
Rightwing comedy is comedic in a way the Shakespearean comedy can be: a story catalyzed from a misunderstanding; reaction instead of reflection. It’s as if the world is constantly sneaking up on them; a world full of horrors looming in the shade, ready to pounce. It’s a very human impulse to shoot first, ask questions later — you don’t stop to ask why the wolf is trying to eat you.
But what if the thing you are punching is not a wolf?
And if you never come across your reflection, how can you be sure that you aren’t the wolf?
This post originally appeared on Medium and is edited and republished with author's permission. Read more of Joshua Adams' work on Medium.