Tweeted Ricky Gervais (after some people criticized his comic performance as host of the Golden Globes).
On Fox News ("The Five"), Greg Gutfeld analyzed the politics and guessed at the structure of Gervais's emotions:
"He's [Gervais] is upset because he's so confident in his liberal ideas that the refusal to listen to other ideas, which is happening right now on the regressive left, enrages him.;.. It's a pathetic sign of weakness...and I think that's what's fueling his fire and why he's so disgusted and angry -- but do not mistake that for him becoming a conservative."I don't know if that explains Gervais, but I understand the dynamic. What Gutfeld said would work as a key to explaining what I've been doing on this blog these past 16 years. Suddenly, I think Gutfeld is talking about himself. I read Gutfeld's Wikipedia page, which links to this 2009 interview in Reason, where he says:
As a teenager, I was a liberal. It helped me in school.... I started to re-examine myself when I went to Berkeley. It was a really bad idea. It was just walking around with a target on your back.
I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives. You realize that there's something distinctly in common between the two groups, the left and the right; the worst part of each of them is the moralizing. On the left, you have people who want to dictate your behavior under the guise of tolerance. Unless you disagree with them. Then the tolerance goes out the window. Which kind of negates the whole idea of tolerance. That's the politically correct moralizing. Then when you become a conservative, the other kind of moralizing comes from religion....
Posts
75 comments:
What about #MeToo.
I knew about Gervais politics. I figured he was just trying to be funny. There’s so much low hanging funny on the left side of the tree going unpicked. He picked some.
Atheists are doing us a huge service.
"Everything I Dislike" by The Crack Emcee
https://store.cdbaby.com/cd/thecrackemcee?_ga=2.146028594.741353935.1578500102-841776844.1578500102
[Chorus]
Everything I dislike about my ex-wife gets fixed by Donald Trump
Everything I don’t need about the elite gets nixed for faking funk
Everything I despise about all these lies Is now getting debunked
Everything I disagree about we gonna see about then we making punks
People nowadays want to be mad, Man
If you in the paper chase, you oughta be glad, Man
It’s a real rat race and can be sad, Man
but your ass got a taste and you were part of the plan
You can move to the front or the back of the line
You can choose to invest or you can choose to decline
You can choose to get smarter or lose your mind
You can try to see clear or you can try to go blind
Whatever you do is now up to you
They done legalized weed - you can think it through
You can make a big plan and get complex
Get on the internet and do a double-check
You can hire somebody to make you an app
“Marketing Department” and all that crap
Set yourself free, Man, don’t hold back
I’m The Crack Emcee and I’m living phat cuz
[Chorus]
I ain’t no big fan of Oprah, Man
Don’t spend a lot of time on the sofa, Man
She don’t look like Steadman ever poked her, Man
Every good rapper always want to choke her, Man
She’s a leader in this movement they call NewAge
where white women go around burning sage
Indians hate them but they won’t stop
You see them in Whole Foods buying rocks
medicine with no ingredients
ethnic foods without ethnic seasoning
“Namaste” is their weird-ass greeting
Little creepy girls over from Sweden
Marianne Williamson ran for leader
Five minutes in and we knew we need her
to keep on talking for entertainment
I called my [divorce] lawyer and said I’m claimant cuz
[Chorus]
“he's so confident in his liberal ideas that the refusal to listen to other ideas, which is happening right now on the regressive left, enrages him....”
In the comments to last night’s cafe post, I detail how the regressive Left became enraged at my conservative opinion and pushback on the Obama Administration’s paying Iran billions and failure to kill QS when they had a chance. My Twitter account has been suspended. I’m appealing.
The Left censors because they can’t stand a rigorous and intellectually honest debate. Total cowards.
Gutfeld is brilliant - "The Five" and "The Greg Gutfeld Show" are the best things currently on TV. Redeye was also exceptional.
How about them Illini, Althouse?
The "moralizing" of Christianity can be a very good thing. It's human nature to search for a common moral code. I'll go with one that has stood the test of 2,000 years of practice.
Before you assume I've never questioned my practice, I left the Church for a couple of decades when I was young to wander in the desert, rejecting everything.
Christianity is a daily practice. I returned to practice 25 years ago. That practice is not about politics.
" "The Five" and "The Greg Gutfeld Show" are the best things currently on TV."
He's not always there on "The Five," but the show is at a much different level when he isn't there.
That's what happens to most of us. We grow up, and laugh at Liberals who don't!!! I LOVE Greg. His Saturday night show is funnier than SNL. Redeye was 100% better than any of the late night shows.
The "Religious Right" is not necessarily "Conservative." It depends a bit on what is important to you. Religion as a set of rules for good behavior is part of our culture and is usually a good idea. Religion that is judgemental on lesser issues that are not widely shared by people who follow what we think of as a Bourgeois sort of life may not be a good idea.
Religion has a history of intolerance but that is mostly history, with the exception of Islam. For some, religion has gone off on wacky paths like environmentalism.
So now we should lean heavily on the incomplete thinking of Greg Gutfield, who obviously believes that black humor is the real world:
The former editor of of lads mag Maxim UK - until sales declined, recently tweeted: "Obama gave them a stack of dead presidents, Trump gave them one dead general."
Yeah, I know - just like his idol Donnie, Greg was only joking. But US troops under missile fire in Iraq are not laughing.
"but the show is at a much different level when he isn't there"
The same can be said about Juan Williams. He used to be much better - always a liberal, but not an idiot. Now, probably 95% of the time, he just parrots the talking points of the hard-left. Maybe it's in his contract.
Gutfeld is right, too bad libertarianism is a dead end. I will go with the side that tries to persuade me of the morality of their beliefs rather than the one that uses coercion. “Big dick energy” is based on attraction, “big structural mom energy” is based on coercion.
" Redeye was also exceptional.”
Well, I did like the leggy women positioned for the camera wearing the Star Trek version of commentator uniforms. Not a criticism of the show, BTW, if you are reading it that way.
I am a classic liberal/conservative/libertarian. I try to divine and believe in the best of each strain of political thought, and work through the contradictions.
I despise the leftist manner of governing; it is at base totalitarian and violent. Their self-believed good intentions in fact disguise their unslakable desire for control over others. Gervais merely scratched the surface of their hypocrisy.
The Hostess commented: " "The Five" and "The Greg Gutfeld Show" are the best things currently on TV."
He's not always there on "The Five," but the show is at a much different level when he isn't there."
True. It's boring without him. Juan Williams is dreadful. Jesse can be brilliant at times. I don't care for Donna Brazile, but at least she's not Williams.
THEOLDMAN
I'd much rather have Greg doing "black humor" (really? is that what it is?) than any of The Squad disrespecting service members.
It never fails to astonish me that the occasional "liberal" who takes off the blinders and sees the *inherent* hypocrisy on the Left (and it is inherent - as Gutfield noted, you can't say you're tolerant of all ideas - and define "tolerance" as "enthusiastic verbal support combined with a complete shutdown of individual critical faculties" - while rejecting, despising, and sometimes physically attacking certain groups for their ideas) so often remains on the Left.
I know it's hard to change sides and harder still to change your mind. But once presented with incontrovertible evidence that your premises are mistaken (to say nothing of *repeatedly* being presented with such evidence!), don't you at least start to shift a bit?
The guys who are building the surveillance state for our government and China's government, the ones who are actually implementing the censorship Progs call for, I bet they think of themselves as libertarians.
It's the difference between "Thou shall" and Thou shall not"; just the common monkey desire to dominate. Politics is what happens when we accept our inner monkeys.
Like, or not Gutfeld does not engage in any discussion using approved talking points. He always thinks beyond the sifted, distilled, binary, choices the media presents on any given situation. Gutfeld constantly reminds his audience it is possible to agree with two or more positions at the same time, always reminding there is something else besides the two sides being offered up by the self determined intellectual elite.
To offer up an opinion the Gutfeld offers up incomplete thinking, shows a lack of exposure to his book of work. TV by design clips thoughts into finite moments. Ive watched entire blocks of programming on MSNBC, that fail to introduce any ideas, let alone, attempt to complete a coherent idea.
The Left believes the American experiment is a failure.
Not just failing, or needs improvement, but a complete failure in every possible dimension.
As such, those who don't agree can't be allowed to contaminate their future vision.
It's really that simple.
@ Aunty Trump
Aw, darn. That was a valuable comment.
It's possible to agree with two diametrically opposed points of view. But that's not the way political issues work. Or voting. Or life. Or points of view.
Libertarianism is a nice esoteric abstraction. Libertarian politics is a dumpster fire of incredibly stupid ideas that lead to incredibly unrealistic conclusions. Libertarian commentators are fun precisely because commentators don't have to do anything but talk. The best, like Gutfield, don't take themselves seriously. The worst spend their time lecturing everyone else about how they're superior to them beause they aren't slaves to ideology but see all sides of everything but will not take any sides on anything.
They're like dogcatchers who have never even seen a dog.
Sure, some conservatives are obnoxiously religious. But many are not. And unlike the Left, there's no one on the Right saying we're kicking you out because you're not extreme enough.
I'm a Libertarian who almost always votes and supports Republicans. I'm 62 and have never voted for a Democrat for national office. I have some disagreements with Trump's brand of Republicanism, but compared to the modern Democrats he's an angel. They actually want Venezuela, although some of them may be too stupid to understand what their policies lead to.
They're like dogcatchers who have never even seen a dog.
But will defend to the death your right to have sex with one.
The problem is there are Progressive Libertarians and Conservative Libertarians...or is it Libertarian Progressives and Libertarian Conservatives.
I don't know which ones are hardest on dogs. My dog doesn't like any of 'em.
All the shows on Fox are filled with people I wouldn't want to have a beer with.
That big, hulking character with the Tatts who turned out to be a predator?
Jesse's an obnoxious adulterer.
They're just all wrong, like Trump's boys.
"But US troops under missile fire in Iraq are not laughing."
I'm sure you're the guy who knows what troops in the field think about this situation. No, they're not laughing. They're doing what they're trained to do in these situations, but they'd probably laugh at the dopey commenter with the pretentious avatar.
Religion is not on one side or the other of the political divide. For every case where it is right wing, you can find a corresponding case of it on the left. The myth that conservatism is religious is what keeps a lot of people with conservative principles from accepting that they are actually conservative. Gervais may be one of these. The primary principle of conservatism in my view is freedom from big government overreach and control - originalist Constitutionalism. It's not that the founders were bringing wisdom from the heavens or were some kind or geniuses. It's that whether by luck or intelligence, the principles and ideas they laid out work so well when followed, and that they lay out what I think is the ideal balance of government and respect for personal freedom. I bet a lot of people believe in that but do not think they are conservatives.
My experience is that the judgmentalness of Christians is perceived more than experienced. Though there are a few christian scolds, most Christians I know are fairly tolerant. Mostly because we have family members (sometimes children) who don't believe or are of a progressive type of Christianity. Most nonbelievers believe Christianity is a list of dos and don'ts (it isn't) and those don'ts are somewhat known because of the christian roots of our culture. They are triggered because of the shame that starts rising to the surface, often by the mere presence of a Christian. I've experienced that quite a few times. Often I don't even confess my faith and I hear snarky comments or crude jokes as if somehow that's going to offend me.
Libertarianism is a nice esoteric abstraction.
Freedom is an esoteric abstraction and...therefore what? It's unimportant?
Libertarian politics is a dumpster fire of incredibly stupid ideas that lead to incredibly unrealistic conclusions.
You might want to do some research, starting with the incredibly stupid ideas in the US Constitution and how they lead to a failed revolution and mass starvation, along with the zany ideas of Milton Friedman and his mindless zombie acolyte Thomas Sowell.
They're like dogcatchers who have never even seen a dog.
Well, you DO seem to be an expert on ignorant bloviation.
Although I mostly identify with libertarianism, the ideological ones are like collectivists in that they expect a utopia with the installment of their ideology. I think conservatives are best at accepting the ugly reality that we can never quite get there, but we can be mostly free, cooperative, and happy, accepting that we will always need to fight the excesses of human nature.
"The myth that conservatism is religious is what keeps a lot of people with conservative principles from accepting that they are actually conservative."
I'm a conservative atheist. The idea that to be conservative requires you to be religious has always puzzled me.
To liberals, every white conservative male is the John Lithgow character from Footloose.
But stereotyping is really really really bad. Just ask them.
"You might want to do some research, starting with the incredibly stupid ideas in the US Constitution and how they lead to a failed revolution and mass starvation"
Where is this happening?
Fernandistein: Which of the Founders, which part of the Constitution, pushes open borders? Cause it's hard to deny that is a core tenet of libertarian politics these days.
I would probably claim to be a libertarian myself, if it wasn't for raging stupidities like that.
gadfly said,
Yeah, I know - just like his idol Donnie, Greg was only joking. But US troops under missile fire in Iraq are not laughing.
1/9/20, 5:56 AM
https://www.newsmax.com/Politics/greg-gutfeld-fox-news-soft-donald-trump/2016/04/04/id/722240/
Read the comments. Greg did not like Trump. He sees how hypocritical the left is, just like the rest of us do, which is why he agrees more with Trump than with any of the crazies on the left. You obviously don't watch the show, and look to Wikipedia to get your facts. (except for your dig at the end which is not true)
Arguably the three funniest writers ever: Aristophanes, Machiavelli, Swift. There's something funny about referring to any of them as conservative. The closest might be to paraphrase them as saying: saying you are radical or progressive doesn't make you one, and certainly doesn't suggest you have thought through the implications. The first two make fun of "woke" women, yet in a way encourage their ambitions. Pursue what is good for yourself; don't pretend you are saving the world.
Educated guess is that the troops in the field are actually laughing.
"He's [Gervais] is upset because he's so confident in his liberal ideas that the refusal to listen to other ideas, which is happening right now on the regressive left, enrages him.;.. It's a pathetic sign of weakness...and I think that's what's fueling his fire and why he's so disgusted and angry -- but do not mistake that for him becoming a conservative."
I agree with this sentiment. It is the overweening pretentiousness of both the Left and Right zealots that is the problem. It is a position of weakness, not strength.
I am guessing this what has ticked Gervais off. This and the hypocrisy of those leading the lavish lifestyles that they do, lecturing others (the peons) on how they should live.
You can hold "liberal" positions or "conservative" positions but to be so rigid and self righteous is a dangerous place to stand. Being unwilling to even listen or consider that there may be some merit in the way that other people think only blinds you to the pitfalls of your own positions. That way of thinking is reminiscent of several posters here (who shall not be named).
To be so smug about how right you are and how stupid others are in a public forum like Golden Globes or Oscars is only going to further distance the sides from any possible meeting of the minds. THEN to do it from a position of fame because you are prettier, more handsome, and can play pretend better than others is a ridiculous argument that only undermines any chance you have of swaying others to your side.
Then...of course, they don't want to sway. They want to dictate from their lofty positions of hypocrisy.
Liberal, conservative, Left/Right are stupid terms people should quit using. They don't have enough of a well-defined meaning, they can mean anything now.
Use proggie/statist and normal/sane in place of the idiot-words.
And remember you don't want to be Bill "people on the right think I am a lib, people on the left think I am Hitler, so I must be right in the sweet spot of 80% of the American public" O'Reilly because that is self-congratulatory bullshit.
Gervais is the Don Rickles of the present day, insulting his equals and betters to produce a few uncomfortable chuckles, but securing the elite in their self-satisfaction. It works because only this one homely foreign git criticizes them to their faces, while everyone else in their world fawns over their every word, no matter how idiotic or hypocritical or wrong.
Where is that hand puppet Rottweiler, Triumph the Insult Comic Dog, when he is most needed?
“Then when you become a conservative, the other kind of moralizing comes from religion....”
I hear this a lot from Libertarians, usually ones who are trying to walk a social tightrope in the Prog milieus of their work and acquaintances.
Like it’s 1985 and the Moral Majority has an office in the basement of the White House. Like Progs, their guidebook is horribly outdated.
Basically, a libertarian is a conservative who's an atheist and likes to use street drugs.
Gutfield's comment is interesting, except there's zero moralizing on "The Right". I've come to realize there's a group of people who ALWAYS have to be in the Center. This isn't really based on issues, its just attitude or mindset. And as society moves Left or Right, they move Left or Right, because they always have to be in the Center. Nixon was like that. As he grew older, he moved Left, and was still calling himself a "Moderate" in 1992, even though his 1992 positions would have been labeled "Extreme Left" in 1962.
I don't trust any "Conservative" who calls himself a libertarian. Bill Weld ran as a "Libertarian" and the Democrat Chaffee is trying to get the POTUS Libertarian nomination in 2020. All it means is, they disagree with some liberal positions on Taxes or Foreign Policy. IOW, Liberals who don't like taxes. You'll notice all the "libertarians" were neutral or hostile to Trump. Big Government Obama didn't bother them, but Businessman Trump was beyond the pale. LOL! They're mostly Phonies.
Gevais is an atheist Lefty who's willing to attack the Left. Good for him, but I don't fool myself into thinking he's on my side.
I've taken several of those online Political Compass types of tests. Most of which are useless because you have to chose one stance or the other with no middle ground type of response. AKA.... IDGAF about the issue in question.
The results are always that I am slightly libertarian and slightly conservative leaning. Near the dead center of the four square grid. The comparison that the tests make is to Milton Friedman. I agree with this as I do really like the thinking of Friedman.
Generally--to sum it up.
Fiscally conservative. Socially liberal. You want an abortion? Fine. Pay for it yourself.
Moderately militarily conservative. Roosevelt's Big Stick theory. Be strong but be judicious about when to use it.
Patriotism. Sure. Be proud of your country, but don't be afraid to call your country out if you feel it is doing wrong. BUT. Do that from a point of informed neutrality.
Religion. Meh. Do what you want. Don't bug me about it. Agnostic.
Thinking people pick and choose the positions that they want to support and refuse to be shoved into a rigid and unchanging labeled box. Liberal, Conservative. Left, Right. These labels mean nothing really other than a way to separate people from each other. PLUS...thinking people will change their positions over time.
Well said DBQ
I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives.
Sounds about like me. The only decent definition I ever heard for a neocon (other than "dirty rotten hook-nosed kike who supported the Iraq war") was "a liberal who thinks liberals are a greater threat to liberalism than are conservatives." By that definition, I am a neocon.
There's another observation I had years ago--there are few things in life more frustrating than watching a position you agree with get defended poorly.
I spend all my real world time around liberals and one thing I've noticed is that, to be a liberal in North America, you have to reject all liberal values. You have to reject the Enlightenment. It is because I support liberal values that most of my ire is directed at liberals.
All the shows on Fox are filled with people I wouldn't want to have a beer with.
Funny! Now do the Dems.
It's not that one group has great people while the other has terrible ones.
It's that one group has people who want to tear down the country, while the other has people who give their lives for it.
Original Mike said...
"I'm a conservative atheist. The idea that to be conservative requires you to be religious has always puzzled me."
Ditto. The logic actually doesn't follow. It's like the religious highjacked it, just as NewAge has liberalism.
I attended a Tea Party gathering one time that turned into a religious revival and that shit was creepy as FUCK.
This country has issues.
frenchy said...
"Basically, a libertarian is a conservative who's an atheist and likes to use street drugs."
No, a conservative is an atheist who likes to use street drugs.
A libertarian's the crazy one.
Kevin said...
"It's not that one group has great people while the other has terrible ones.
It's that one group has people who want to tear down the country, while the other has people who give their lives for it."
Agreed, but who's casting these things? How hard can it be to find reasonable-looking people who don't regularly put both feet in their mouths?
Gregg Gutfeld is a producer - he should be behind the scenes, throwing out ideas, and whispering in people's ears - not in front of the camera. He ruins the brand.
That's the nasty thing about conservatives: they use so many plastic bags. And the straws!
Liberalism is divergent. Progressivism is monotonic. Libertarianism is emergent. Conservatism is moderating. American conservatism is classical liberal tempered with religious (i.e. moral) principles by virtue of the nation's charter.
along with the zany ideas of Milton Friedman and his mindless zombie acolyte Thomas Sowell.
That has got to be the singularly dumbest comment made today, on the ENTIRE internet and that includes all of the tweets by those TDS sufferers!
I detail how the regressive Left became enraged at my conservative opinion
Progressive (i.e. monotonic), imputed perceptions notwithstanding. Principles matter. Evolution (i.e. chaos) is not monotonic, positive, negative, or neutral. Fitness functions matter.
You might want to do some research, starting with the incredibly stupid ideas in the US Constitution and how they lead to a failed revolution and mass starvation...
along with the zany ideas of Milton Friedman and his mindless zombie acolyte Thomas Sowell.
Sarcasm.
along with the zany ideas of Milton Friedman and his mindless zombie acolyte Thomas Sowell.
If Sowell were white, they could dismiss him as racist. But since he's not, they have to discredit him as an insigificant sellout.
It's required to maintain the charade only white people can be racist.
As they go about separating people into white and non-white groups.
Kevin said...
"If Sowell were white, they could dismiss him as racist. But since he's not, they have to discredit him as an insigificant sellout."
I think TS is respected, but he DOES appear to exist, more often than not, only to help white guys with their talking points than to help blacks with ours. And the fact he never engages black critics, while always appearing on white shows like "Uncommon Knowledge" (where he faces relatively easy and fawning questioning) isn't helpful to his image overall. But he's known, and respected. I'd even say liked.
Amongst blacks anyway. I can't speak for liberals generally.
A specter is haunting Althouse. It is the specter of LIBERTARIANISM.
All of these zingers about Libertarians Are Just (there should be a tag) make me think that some people are really fearful of libertarian ideas. Which may actually count as progress.
Libertarians/libertarians are a diverse group, just the same as Atheists/atheists, Liberals/liberals, Cons/cons, Believers/believers.
I call myself a 'libertarian' or sometimes a 'classical liberal' not because I love any shit some other person claiming to be one, or accused of being one, manages to plop out, but because the other labels fit even worse. (Ditto atheist.)
Narr
LWR@836! Twain! Nietzsche!
I catch The Five as it is on when I happen to be in front of the TV. I tune in to judge the talking points but I admit I don't care much for the usuals (full disclosure: Perino is my neighbor). Sometimes the woman that occupies the revolving first seat is on point. Kennedy, Compagno or that blonde from Outnumbered come to mind...
Crack Emcee: "Gregg Gutfeld is a producer - he should be behind the scenes, throwing out ideas, and whispering in people's ears - not in front of the camera. He ruins the brand."
Maybe actual ratings matter....or don't.....whatever, right?
Is Fox News Channel's Greg Gutfeld The Next King Of Late Night TV?
"Fox News dominates the prime-time cable news ratings, but now the network has a hit in late night. Fox's Greg Gutfeld, whose The Greg Gutfeld Show airs Saturday nights at 10 p.m., finished May with a total audience of 1.8 million viewers—drawing bigger ratings than late night's biggest broadcast stars, including ABC's Jimmy Kimmel, NBC's Seth Meyers and CBS' James Corden.
The May ratings performance makes Gutfeld's show the third most-watched show in all of late-night television, ahead of Jimmy Kimmel Live (1.7 million), CBS's Late, Late Show (1.2 million) and ABC's Nightline (1.1 million)."
Fox News's 'Greg Gutfeld Show' draws more viewers than weeknight hosts Seth Meyers, James Corden
Also, well said DBQ.
Libertarians are anarchists who favor free markets. My first political "guru" as a teen was Karl Hess, IIR.
My sense is that Gervais, like yourself and a portion of those who read your blog, is allergic to being told what to think by people who manage to be both ignorant and arrogant.
Drago said...
"The Greg Gutfeld Show finished May with a total audience of 1.8 million viewers"
There are 328 million people in the United States.
We obviously have different ideas about what constitutes "popular" or "good ratings".
The business has been dumbed down, and the ratings have fallen with them. They dress that fact up any way they can.
Agree with DBQ at 8:53.
Part of the problem are political partisans. As soon as politics becomes a battle then there are no standards or principles that are applied consistently to both sides. And truth is always a casualty in war.
The idea that to be conservative requires you to be religious has always puzzled me.
Agreed. As an Agnostic, I couldn't give two rips about religion. To each his/her own. Just keep me out of it.
Things that are super fun to discuss on Althouse, in no particular order:
1. Movies and/or movie theaters.
2. Television/Hollywood in general.
3. Who libertarians really are.
Interesting about Gutfeld. I did pretty much exactly the same thing: Was super-liberal in HS (mind you, this is early 80s, so vast swathes of "liberalism" have opened up since that weren't even a glimmer in a nut case's eye back then); then I went to Berkeley, found myself surrounded by people even leftier than I was, and moved rapidly rightward. Only, for all practical purposes, there were no "conservatives" at Cal at all. A few libertarians, yes (one of my close friends in my own department, mechanical engineering, was one), and a few instinctive provocateurs. Among the latter was Max Boot, far nastier and further right than his current WaPo self, though a lot more interesting... but the only "conservative" I knew at Cal was a composer I met after I switched departments to musicology for grad school. He protected himself from the lefty mayhem by not talking about politics at all. So, most of the time, did I.
The issues were different then: mostly affirmative action, nuclear weapons (ours, not the Iranians or the Norks), divestment from still-Apartheid South Africa, Iran/Contra, occasionally abortion or the Palestinians or homelessness. Oh, and a grove of trees slated to be cut down that were "rescued" by one Julia "Butterfly" Hill, who picked her favorite and proceeded to live high up in it for the next several months. And People's Park, which actually did get reclaimed finally as school property, somehow. Not really on the agenda: transgenderism, gay marriage (this was right in the AIDS epidemic; gays had other things to worry about), "othering," guns, immigration, plastics, "me too," "intersectionality" generally. I felt like I was drinking lefty politics through a fire hose, but compared to today it was utterly minuscule.
Known Unknown seems to be bored.
Narr
Step it up, people!
Religion as a set of rules for good behavior is part of our culture
Exactly, morality, or ethics (i.e. relativistic religion), a behavioral protocol. Faith (i.e. logical domain), traditions, and philosophers (e.g. God, mortal gods), are separable. Everyone has a religion. Everyone has a faith. Everyone has traditions. Ironically, sort of, kind of, not really, the greatest risk in recent centuries has been posed by Atheists, mortal gods, a Pro-Choice (i.e. selective, opportunistic, politically congruent) religion, a liberal (i.e. divergent) ideology, spread by the scalpel.
Gervais sees a target that's too big to ignore. That the trendy Hollywood left doesn't joke about itself and doesn't take jokes about itself very gracefully, makes them all the more tempting a target.
Plus, he knows the group he's satirizing very well. He may dislike fundamentalists or corporate bigwigs even more than he dislikes egotistical, politically correct Hollywood stars, but he doesn't have as much familiarity with those targets, so quips about them wouldn't work as well for him.
Veep works because most of the jokes are liberals making jokes about liberals. Garry Trudeau had a TV series somewhere where he goes after the usual right-wing Republican targets and it didn't work, because it didn't escape the usual well-worn cliches.
Post a Comment