Concatenated for sharing with others. Paragraphing added as seen appropriate. (Former copy editor here. I have my license to do this.)
I wrote my PhD dissertation on the social function of humor (in literature & film) and hereâs the thing about âjust joking.â
Youâre never âjust joking.â Nobody is ever âjust joking.â Humor is a social act that performs a social function (always). To say humor is social act is to say it is always in social context; we donât joke alone. Humor is a way we relate/interact with others. Which is to say, humor is a way we construct identity - who we are in relation to others. We use humor to form groups and to find our individual place in or out of those groups. In short, joking/humor is one tool by which we assimilate or alienate.
In other words, we use humor to bring people into - or keep them out of - our social groups. This is what humor does. What itâs for. Consequently, how we use humor is tied up with ethics - who do we embrace, who do we shun, and how/why?
And the assimilating/alienating function of humor works not only only people but also on ideas. This is important. This is why, e.g., racist âjokesâ are bad. Not just because they serve to alienate certain people, but also because they serve to assimilate the idea of racism (the idea of alienating people based on their race). And so we come to Trump.
A racist joke sends a message to the in-group that racism is acceptable. (If you donât find it acceptable, youâre in the out-group.) The racist joke teller might say âjust jokingâ - but this is a defense to the out-group. He doesnât have to say this to the in-group.
This is why weâre never âjust joking.â To the in-group, no defense of the joke is needed; the idea conveyed is accepted/acceptable. So, when Trump jokes about assassination or armed revolt, heâs asking the in-group to assimilate/accept that idea. Thatâs what jokes do.
And when he says âjust joking,â thatâs a defense offered to the out-group who was never meant to assimilate the idea in the first place. Indeed, circling back to the start, the joke itself is a way to define in-group and out-group, through assimilation & alienation.
If youâre willing to accept âjust jokingâ as defense, youâre willing to enter in-group where idea conveyed by the joke is acceptable. In other words, if âjust jokingâ excuses racist jokes, then in-group has accepted idea of racism as part of being in-group. Same goes for âjokesâ about armed revolt or assassinating Hillary Clinton. They cannot be accepted as âjust joking.â
Now, a big caveat: humor (like all language) is complicated and always a matter of interpretation. For example, we might have racist humor that is, in fact, designed to alienate (rather than assimilate) the idea of racism. (Think satire or parody.) But I think itâs pretty clear Trump was not engaging in some complex satirical form of humor. He was âjust joking.â In the worst sense.
Bottom line: donât accept âjust jokingâ as excuse for what Trump said today. The in-group for that joke should be tiny. Like his hands.
â Jason P. Steed, appellate attorney and former English professor from Texas
Iâm getting so tired of this, I almost feel like-
https://gfycat.com/MeanRipeHartebeest
âŚnote that this was done by a supporter, not a critic.
And itâs a pre-made flag available outside. One of many amongst a bulk-order.
And itâs monogrammed, of course, with the Vulgarianâs name. Didnât notice that part before. Welp. There goes any defense against the GOP not being the White Nationalist party.
Just Joking Guy must be related to the Just Saying Guy and the Iâm Not Racist, But⌠Guy.
They are all related, without a doubt, from the very same shitty familyâŚ
Yeah, all sired by That Fucking Guy.
I like how hard they tried to ignore the elephant in the corner of the room with the explanation of the poll results. Dance around it all you want, Gallup, but racism is what is drawing support to Trump.
Iâve been saying for months that Trump wasnât going to pivot to the centre because his plan is to get out the extremist base and use intimidation to suppress the opposing vote.
Here it is:
Kevin Drum, over at Mother Jones, is trying to do a similar dance. âhmm, is it economic uncertainty?â At least, though, heâs willing to admit the possibility of it being white nativism/supremacy, but keeps trying to find polls and such that show that that isnât the sole factor.
Sure, the missing piece of the puzzle is that far too many people who identify as Republican are authoritarian followers, so they want to be told what to do, which Trump seems fine with doing.
There. Mystery solved.
