American politics has a satire problem. There is too much of it. when we see the writings of George Orwell’s ANIMAL FARM or 1984, we are seeing a piece of literature that was written during a time when putting the truth plainly involved a certain risk to the writer and their audience. ANIMAL FARM was taking a stab at Communist Russia that had become The Soviet Union. The goal was to prevent westerners from finding such a method of government appealing during the era of the Iron Curtain. Satire exists as an affront to the prohibition of speaking the truth plainly. For the most part, the United States has a great number of journalists and news outlets that get to say their views without necessarily fearing the loss of life – for the most part. You are allowed to express your views about the contending candidates for office; from the presidency, legislature to the state governor and city mayor. We have social media and tons of news outlets where opinions are expressed daily regarding the state of affairs in the nation that do not put the writers’ lives at risk. So why do we need so much satire?

In the early 2000’s two comedians peaked on the Comedy Central network with the weekly nightly shows: The Daily Show & The Chappelle Show respectively. Jon Stewart and Dave Chappelle, took to airwaves with comical renditions of the news headlines in an era where speaking against the then president’s (George W. Bush) decision to invade Iraq was considered verboten. Jon Stewart got belly laughs out of replaying news clips that brought out the incoherence of the White House statements and Dave Chappelle had a recurring character called Black Bush who expressed rather bluntly the aims of the then administration by doubling down on his decisions as if to affirm his reasoning on the surface but the joke was understood in its exaggeration as exclaimed during a skit:

“This man tried to kill my father?”

“Who’s talking about oil b…., you cooking?

Some of these skits still get recurring play on YouTube for how perfectly they captured the oddity of the day. On the other hand, the Dixie Chicks lost their access to the radio airwaves after making their thoughts public about the Iraq Invasion. They spoke plainly and got punished. Prior to the success of these two nightly shows, several Americans had expressed their disapproval of this invasion. There were several write-ups and articles in the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post… All of which fell on deaf ears. There was even political commentator/comedian, Bill Maher who got his show POLITICALLY INCORRECT cancelled for criticising the US airstrikes into Baghdad. That was not an era to speak the truth plainly either for lack of effectiveness or fear of political retaliation. But the little known comedy network, Comedy Central turned into a cult favorite as their small audience might have been considered less threatening. However, this small network birthed the tonal revolution in American politics for the subsequent decade.

One of the highlights of this influence was during President Barack Obama’s campaign for his second term. His opponent, Mitt Romney was caught up in a controversy whereby he was trying to reassure his corporate donors about his commitment to preserve the access to his cabinet but all that made the airwaves was the continuous harping on the phrase “binder full of women.” In a span of days, a campaign that was posing a sufficient risk to the Obama campaign was driven out of contention because Mitt Romney could not escape the mockery of news media for turning him into a laughing stock. Much worse was during the 2016 presidential campaign when Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton was proverbially measuring the curtains of the White House during the Obama swan song. Majority of the skits on the No. 1 skit show, Saturday Night Live were constantly poking fun at her opponent Donald Trump. Some of which she showed up in person to take her fair share of stabs at him. But unfortunately, this is where things took a turn.

Satire is cathartic. It thrives off censorship and fear of authoritarian retaliation. Effective satire punches up. One of the smartest ways to punch up is by exaggerating the validation of the person in power. In the case of Dave Chappelle in Black Bush, he did this by exaggerating the George W. Bush’s reasoning of the Iraq invasion no matter how ridiculous. The moment a person becomes the direct butt of the joke, it is assumed they are not a threat to the jokester. Thus the more you make fun of someone the more the jokester becomes the authority and the butt of the joke turns into a sympathetic figure. This was where the plot was lost when satire was used against Donald Trump. He thrived as the butt of the joke because by the time he had to absorb jokes against him, the jokesters had acquiesced to the power of the day; Trump’s establishment opponents. He was hard to exaggerate because he made extremely bold claims, that bordered on dark humor. This was seen on social media and then at press conferences where he would double down. He was both jokester and butt of the joke at the same time. It was hard to tell where the policy ended and the joke began. He rendered satirical commentary rather useless.

Ironically, this neutralisation of satire as a method of punching up at the political administration turned into an opportunity for people who were genuinely interested in policy to ask deeper questions and think literally. With the number of independent news channels and non-partisan commentary that can be seen on YouTube, one has to wonder whether the mainstream media lost the plot somewhere along the way. Look no further than the nightly news programs or morning talks shows on the major networks to see journalists turn into pundits and commentators turn into ideological hostages. Each looking for a new joke to spin or a new insult they hope will drain the reputation of their less favorite candidate. It is as though no one has told them, “You can speak your mind now. It is your right.”

But what if they can’t? Who’s the laughing stock now?

By Julian Michael Yong