Comments on: Foreigners Around the World

Foreigners Around the World

geoff. — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 09:32:25 -0800

Israelis, "They were personally responsible for the fall of the Roman Empire, the 1929 stock market crash, and the loss of World War II by a prominent European country." On Canada, "It is thought to resemble a sort of arctic Nebraska." It's okay because it's both unapologetic and National Lampoon circa Animal House. Harvard boys in the 60s were original ironic hipsters!

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 09:36:18 -0800

Dad? Mom?

By: Nelson

Nelson — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 09:45:54 -0800

Wow, was this ever funny? I like offensive humour as much as the next white guy. But these jokes aren't just offensive, they're mostly lame.

By: PinkStainlessTail

PinkStainlessTail — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 09:47:53 -0800

*Stupid comment about the modern day, truly conservative P.J. O'Rourke, and how he probably views foreigners the same way now but isn't joking* Just to save someone else the trouble.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 09:48:13 -0800

I laughed. PJ O'Rourke can definitely be funny when he puts his mind to it.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:00:35 -0800

Isn't PJ O'Rourke just a racist anyway?

By: solipse

solipse — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:04:17 -0800

It's funny, but it is neither ironic nor hip, both of which would require a hefty dose of self-mockery.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:06:13 -0800

Isn't PJ O'Rourke just a racist anyway? Aren't we all? I say better to throw all the stereotypes and prejudices on the table rather than the banal faux-politeness we're all practicing.

By: geoff.

geoff. — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:11:54 -0800

it is neither ironic nor hip, both of which would require a hefty dose of self-mockery. I always equate rich, white kids making jokes about race as being hipster. Maybe that's just a Viceland thing.

By: y6y6y6

y6y6y6 — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:12:19 -0800

I'm having a hard time finding the irony or humor here. It's okay because it's unapologetic? So because someone wasn't ashamed to be laughing at dumb racist jokes they get a pass? Seriously. I'm confused. Also - I read lots of National Lampoon circa Animal House and I'm sure this wasn't funny even then. SNL and others back then could do this with plenty of humor and irony. But the National Lampoon take is just asinine.

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:12:43 -0800

At least this is a demonstration that was passes for offensive humor nowadays is just conservative claptrap, whereas, in the grand old days, it was balls-to-the-wall racism. Bravo! Now let me track down the 9-year-old version of myself who used to read this crap and find it funny. I've got to kill that kid for his abominable taste.

By: Artw

Artw — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:13:34 -0800

Hey! PJ O'Rourke used to be funny! Stop the hatin'...

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:15:20 -0800

I'm having trouble believing many of you. You may not have wanted to laugh, but you laughed. Therein lies the rub.

By: parallax7d

parallax7d — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:18:29 -0800

jonmc, I am not a racist, and I would not smother "everyone" with that title like you have. Your last 2 comments seem to say "Hey, be a racist, eveyone is doing it". What's the deal?

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:20:10 -0800

I didn't laugh.

By: y6y6y6

y6y6y6 — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:21:29 -0800

Your horse is dead. No one wanted to ride it anyway. Time for a new agenda that you may hold us all in contempt with. We get it already - We're hypocrites when we show any dislike for racism. Right. No, we did not all laugh. It's your fixation. Don't confuse it with reality.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:21:53 -0800

Your last 2 comments seem to say "Hey, be a racist, eveyone is doing it". What's the deal? No, but I'll happily admit to laughing my ass off at some of it. Mainly since O'Rourke is a good comedic writer. And anyone of any race who claims not to be a racist is either lying or in denial. Racism's still a bad thing, but let's start with honesty, please.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:22:48 -0800

Your horse is dead. No one wanted to ride it anyway. The vociferousness of the reaction to it says otherwise.

By: Baby_Balrog

Baby_Balrog — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:24:42 -0800

I'm not a racist.

By: Witty

Witty — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:25:01 -0800

I am.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:25:28 -0800

i'd like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony i'd like to buy the world a coke ...

By: geoff.

geoff. — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:27:59 -0800

Maybe I'm just naive, but isn't this satire? He makes racism look ridiculous by going over the top, see the above Israeli joke.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:28:20 -0800

I'm not a racist. Keep telling yourself that. No being on earth is free of some kind of prejudice. I'm not defending it, just stating a fact. Generally speaking, I'm suspicious of people who deny this, since I assume they're mainly doing so to accuse others and deny their own part in things. As someone once said: You're either part of the problem, or you're a fucking liar.

By: feathermeat

feathermeat — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:30:21 -0800

I don't think there's anything particularly funny about most of these. I guess the point was to present the stereotypes in the most outrageous, over-the-top possible way, to make them look absurd or something, but I don't think it worked. That being said, I did laugh at the part about the English often having large collections of useless things like lamp finials or toad eggs.

By: y6y6y6

y6y6y6 — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:30:27 -0800

"The vociferousness of the reaction to it says otherwise." My bad. I forgot. Anything which is denied is true. You make a very persuasive case sir. As to your accusations that I'm a racist, let me embrace this newly rediscovered grade school playground logic - I'm rubber and you're glue. Whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you.

By: Rothko

Rothko — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:35:34 -0800

Keep telling yourself that. No being on earth is free of some kind of prejudice. I'm not defending it, just stating a fact. Generally speaking, I'm suspicious of people who deny this, since I assume they're mainly doing so to accuse others and deny their own part in things. posted by jonmc at 1:28 PM EST on December 28 [!] Jon, respectfully, while I understand what you're getting at, I have to wonder if you sometimes revel in it a tad?

By: gompa

gompa — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:39:02 -0800

anyone of any race who claims not to be a racist is either lying or in denial. Hey, now - some of my best friends are washed-up, mailing-it-in humour writers who were actually at their best as Rolling Stone political correspondents. Now, O'Rourke's recollections of his hippie days? That shit is funny . . .

By: y6y6y6

y6y6y6 — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:40:11 -0800

"You're either part of the problem, or you're a fucking liar." So it's not enough that I think of all men and women as fundamentally equal? It's not enough that I find racist comments objectionable and I refuse to find them funny? If everyone is a racist and no amount of not being a racist will prevent that, then what is your point? If we don't find that funny, how can we stop pretending we don't find it funny? If not being racist isn't enough to avoid being racist, how might one go about not being racist? And to contrast - If one has pernicious issues that they insist on projecting on everyone else, that might be resolved by just dropping it after looking foolish for the 120th time.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:42:04 -0800

Yes, Rothko, I do revel in showing up hypocrisy and self-serving gestures. Ya got me. First of all, y6, if you think I don't take racism seriously you obviously didn't read this thread earlier today. Second, with the exception of a few drinking buddies I hold the whole human race in contempt, not just you.* Third, my point is merely this: we all fall alover ourselves to be the first to declare how offended we are by stuff like this or to make brave statements like "Racism is bad!" and wait for someone to pin a rose on us. It's self serving, just like many white liberals I know who crow "I just loove black people." I always want to say, "Of course you do, you don't know any." *I exaggerate. I love people, I just hate humaity. Most people are the other way around.

By: Witty

Witty — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:42:33 -0800

y6y6y6 - What has six balls and fucks black people?

By: Baby_Balrog

Baby_Balrog — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:43:52 -0800

"No being on earth is free of some kind of prejudice." jonmc, I can agree with this statement. I have several prejudices I routinely work on every day. Nearly all of them have to do my politics, though. i.e. I am prejudiced against people who drive SUVs - I secretly believe they're all soulless, self-centered red-staters. This is a ridiculous prejudice and I work on contradicting it every time it pops into my head. I'm still sort of prejudiced against old people. I don't know what it is, but I always assume that they'll think my ideas are stupid or worthless and so there isn't really any reason to even speak to them. This is a dumb prejudice, many older folks are actually quite open to new ideas. Cops. I have a really hard time with this one. I fucking hate cops. Cops make my blood boil. For the longest time I thought it was an "authority" thing, but I'm not so sure any more. If a fire-chief or a professor or a judge or a doctor tells me to jump, and almost always do. But there's a tiny part of my brain that screams "all cops hate you and are out to wreck your life" whenever I see the man in blue. This is incredibly stupid, especially because most cops are probably more interested in keeping me safe, rather than hurting or attacking me. Cops aren't dumb, in fact most people who work as hard at something as cops do aren't 'dumb'. But I am not a racist. I grew up in an extremely racially diverse setting, I work with a diverse bunch of people, I've lived in other countries and even been persecuted because of my skin color. I cannot think of one time in my life when I've looked at someone of a difference race and had a stupid stereotype pop into my head or that I've acted in a prejudiced way against them because of their race. Maybe it's because I'm only 22 and haven't had racism beaten into my head by apologists like you, jonmc. But you can take your whole, "Racism is ok because everyone is a racist," act and shove it. It's bullshit, and I think you know it. I think you're just stirring the pot. And just for the record - I think the material linked to in this post isn't funny - I think it's slack-jawed idiocy. It isn't even mildly humorous. It's sensationalist - the only people I can imagine finding humor in it are old racist guys. I'll defend its right to exist, but anyone who laughs at it should crawl back into the frathouse they were spawned in. Fratboys. I guess I'm prejudiced against them, too.

By: languagehat

languagehat — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:44:48 -0800

jonmc, while as you know you're one of my favorite guys around here, you should stop and ask yourself how much you're accomplishing when your comments are so predictable they could have been written by a jonmcbot. Fine, you found it funny; you could profitably have left it at that. Everyone who agrees with you that we're all racists already agrees with you; nobody else is going to be convinced by your vehemence.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:44:59 -0800

So it's not enough that I think of all men and women as fundamentally equal? You think of them that way, but do you always act accordingly? I'm sorry but I have yet to meet anyone, myself included, who is without sin on this front (and I mean all kinds of prejudices, not merely racial ones). If we accept that, we can lower the accusatory, emotional tone of the debate and maybe make some progress. Just one an's opinion. Feel free to disregard and continue showing us how great you are for believing differently.

By: athenian

athenian — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:45:26 -0800

jonmc - I'll buy that we're all a little racist, but that doesn't make it OK to say racist things. If you walk down the street and see a fat person, you might think "cut out the cakes and get some exercise, you slob", but you wouldn't think it's appropriate to say it. I found these pieces not even slightly funny. Except the joke about the Chinese people going into a bar, though even that's a less funny version of a better joke.

By: Rothko

Rothko — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:45:29 -0800

Jon, is it okay to say though some of it made me laugh a little, I was offended? Or does that make me a bad person?

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:46:20 -0800

"Racism is ok because everyone is a racist," Strawman. I never said it was OK, merely that it is.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:46:56 -0800

Rothko: *applause* Thank you. Give the crazy gay welshman a cheroot!

By: Witty

Witty — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:47:20 -0800

The Virginia Lottery! Now that's funny. No?

By: SweetJesus

SweetJesus — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:48:47 -0800

Oh christ, not another thread about defender-of-the-underclass Jonmc and race..

By: jsavimbi

jsavimbi — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:50:08 -0800

I, for one, laughed. Those who didn't, did not get it.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:50:40 -0800

Nobody brought up any underclass but you, SweetJesus. Now do you want to deal with the substance of what I'm trying to communicate or do you just want to brawl or something?

By: Witty

Witty — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:52:33 -0800

That's just SweetJesus' prejudice talking.

By: PantsOfSCIENCE

PantsOfSCIENCE — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:52:35 -0800

Third, my point is merely this: we all fall alover ourselves to be the first to declare how offended we are by stuff like this or to make brave statements like "Racism is bad!" and wait for someone to pin a rose on us. Yeah! Like those people who fall all over themselves to be first to point out perceived hypocrisy (every fucking time) then spend the rest of the thread defen... oh fuck it.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:53:52 -0800

Now do you want to deal with the substance of what I'm trying to communicate or do you just want to brawl or something? we want to brawl, of course ... isn't that what you wanted?

By: Captaintripps

Captaintripps — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:56:05 -0800

I'm a racist, but that wasn't funny.

By: It's Raining Florence Henderson

It's Raining Florence Henderson — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:58:39 -0800

I am not a racist because I hate everybody equally.

By: SweetJesus

SweetJesus — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:01:10 -0800

Nobody brought up any underclass but you, SweetJesus. Jonmc: Third, my point is merely this: we all fall alover ourselves to be the first to declare how offended we are by stuff like this or to make brave statements like "Racism is bad!" and wait for someone to pin a rose on us. It's self serving, just like many white liberals I know who crow "I just loove black people." I always want to say, "Of course you do, you don't know any. Ahhh yes, nothing to do with class. Just a discussion about how we while liberals, who loooooove black people, even though we don't know any. Nothing to do with class what so ever (as if race and class aren't intertwined). You have a habit of coming into every fucking thread that has even a tangential relationship to human sociology, and ranting about how we're all racist white effite liberals who are secretly terrified of black people, even though we profess to love them. Eventualluy, the thread just becomes all about jonmc. You've made your point, let it die. Sorry, but it's just gets old. It's hard to have a discussion with a broken record.

By: MrMoonPie

MrMoonPie — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:03:16 -0800

On Wednesday nights, I have dinner with my daughter, then we go to the library. While she does her homework, I leaf through old issues of Life. It's fun to read the old ads, like the one for Banquet lemon-cream pies: “sultry! suave! sybaritic!" The most amazing thing was a story I found from the week my dad was born, in 1938. Georgetown University had a Nazi party! No, not a chapter of the National Socialist German Workers Party, but an actual party, with a Nazi theme. See, it was funny then to have 100 or so college boys dressed as Hitler, goose-stepping around the quad (or whatever they have at GU). Quite bizarre.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:03:21 -0800

For some reason whenever I think "Harvard in the 60s" the image that comes to mind is that of Tucker Carlson -- white, probably family-wealthy and wearing bow ties.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:03:54 -0800

ranting about how we're all racist white effite liberals who are secretly terrified of black people, even though we profess to love them I'm saying that everyone, of every race, every class, in every country is to some degree guilty here. And if we realize that, we can maybe have the discussion more calmly and maybe make some progress. I'd actually like to discuss the merits of that idea. Maybe you want to talk about me, I dunno.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:05:32 -0800

Somehow I'd be surprised if the "Recommend this to a friend" link is seeing much action today.

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:08:09 -0800

It is possible to get a joke and not find it funny. And I do not for a second believe that O'Rourke was exploding racism by exaggerating it to show how ridiculous it is. I think he thought he was being a naughty little comedy rebel by indulging in the most reprehensible behavior he could muster, and trying to excuse himself from criticism, as people on this thread are trying to excuse him, by claiming that it's just comedy, and Jesus, get a sense of humor. I will remind you that the greatest weapon of the schoolyard bully is mockery, and that doesn't make it allowable. And, because others laugh at other's expense, it doesn't mean such jokes are funny. Just that those who laugh wish they were bullies too.

By: Tommy Gnosis

Tommy Gnosis — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:11:17 -0800

African Probably not people at all. Probably some kind of monkey. They eat each other and worship bundles of sticks and mud. You can never remember the names of their countries, which have a new Main Nigger every half hour and too many snakes and bugs anyway. Indian Dismal, obsequious deminiggers ... 'Sub-' is no idle prefix in its application to this continent. Jesus fucking cheeerist. Can some of you that found this amusing explain the humor to me, or why I don't "get it"? In order for something so patently offensive to be funny, it should have some measure of self-reference, or recognition that the observer is some kind of ignorant half-wit. Instead, this reads like some kind of White Power or Klan tract. I'll admit that despite our best courses of PC re-education (I went to college in the late 80s), I still have some racist impulses that make me extremely disappointed in myself, but I really can't see any humor on any of that.

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:13:24 -0800

"At any rate, they are apparently able to train Frenchmen to play hockey, which is more than any European has ever been able to do." Come on, that's funny.

By: Tommy Gnosis

Tommy Gnosis — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:15:24 -0800

It is funny, crash. Until you hear it in your head in PJ's squeaky nasal drone. And then, it kind of sucks.

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:16:04 -0800

Ah, good point.

By: SweetJesus

SweetJesus — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:16:19 -0800

I'd actually like to discuss the merits of that idea. Maybe you want to talk about me, I dunno. I'm not sure if you really want to have a discussion. I just think you like to profess your somewhat strange views on race ad-infinitum, and wait for the fur to fly. Maybe I took the bait, and I shouldn't have. Whatever, I'd rather not derail into this further. As for my take on the link, this is my favorite: AUSTRALIANS: Violently loud alcoholic roughnecks whose idea of fun is to throw up on your car. The national sport is breaking furniture and the average daily consumption of beer in Sydney is ten and three quarters Imperial gallons for children under the age of nine. "Making a Shambles" is required study in the primary schools and all Australians are bilingual, speaking both English and Sheep. Possibly as a result of their country's being upside down, the local dialect has over 400 terms for vomit.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:18:07 -0800

I'm saying that everyone, of every race, every class, in every country is to some degree guilty here. it's amazing how you manage to talk to 6 1/2 billion people and still have time to post to metafilter ... but, you know, just the other day, i was looking at a 3 month old baby in a carriage and she called me a "honky", so maybe you have something there do you know what the real problem here is? ... you're indulging in gross, obvious generalizations that don't actually SAY anything ... it's like posting to a thread about cancer and pointing out that everybody dies of something ... it might be true, but is it a really useful thing to say? do you really think you're the first person to come up with this concept that everybody is racist? ... do you really think that the reaction's going to be anything but "yeah, whatever" or self-righteous denial? ... do you really think you're going to come up with any insights from anyone that wouldn't happen in a freshman high school communications class? did you really think we were going to have a deep conversation with a link like that in the first place? here ... just type EIAR for "everybody is a racist" next time you want to comment on a thread like this and we'll all know what you've said Maybe you want to talk about me, I dunno. well, it's bound to be more interesting than the link or what you've had to say about it

By: InfidelZombie

InfidelZombie — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:19:08 -0800

I've never found P.J O'Rourke funny, but this was stupid even for him. If you want good racial humor, rent Blazing Saddles.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:19:11 -0800

I'm not sure if you really want to have a discussion. I honestly do, FWIW. Why else would I keep bringing it up? I don't actually enjoy fighting, contrary to popular belief.

By: geoff.

geoff. — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:19:52 -0800

Tommy Gnosis, P.J. O'Rourke is a well known political satirist. The National Lampoon is a well known satirical organization. It's not "Look how stupid black people are, LOL" it's "Look how stupid racism is, LOL." Think reading Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" and getting upset that he wants to kill Irish babies.

By: Rumple

Rumple — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:21:55 -0800

jonmc: you bring it up because you are a troll.

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:23:14 -0800

Bullshit. I maintain that it's O'Roarke being racist and thinking it's funny.

By: caddis

caddis — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:23:34 -0800

Stay back, I've got a gun!

By: bjrubble

bjrubble — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:23:51 -0800

I actually thought it was funny when it wasn't being racist. The entry about Australians, for example, was chuckle-worthy. The problem was things like this: "You can never remember the names of their countries, which have a new Main Nigger every half hour and too many snakes and bugs anyway." I probably would find some guilty humor in the confusing names of African countries and their tendency toward violent, corrupt, and impermanent leadership. But this is just lazy and witless.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:24:52 -0800

Rumple: please. That's a nice way to dismiss veiws you might not like, but grow up. maxsparber: now you're a mindreader. Quick, what am I thinking right now?

By: Tommy Gnosis

Tommy Gnosis — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:25:07 -0800

I'm 38 years old, geoff, I know who P.J. O'Rourke is. As a matter of fact, I thought Eat the Rich was a stupid, self-inflating piece of shite, much like the author himself. We'll have to disagree on whether the "meta" of that is very funny. We can debate on whether this is good satire, but as you know, good satire doesn't necessarily have to be funny. What I'm saying is that teh funny isn't there. It's not twisted or clever enough, in my view at least. Perhaps I'd have felt differently about it, if I didn't know who the author was. We'll never know.

By: ibmcginty

ibmcginty — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:26:22 -0800

it's like posting to a thread about cancer and pointing out that everybody dies of something ... it might be true, but is it a really useful thing to say? Pyramidtermite has it. It's not that jonmc is factually inaccurate, but that the truism that the human brain engages in generalizations doesn't get us very far. Harping on that fact comes across as an excuse to do nothing, a recipe for paralysis.

By: SweetJesus

SweetJesus — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:29:07 -0800

Why else would I keep bringing it up? I have no fucking idea, yet I could set my watch to your racial philosophizing. Like swallows returning to Capistrano, it's just so predictable..

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:30:21 -0800

I'm not a mindreader, johnmc. I'm just a reader. I know O'Roarke's writing here is hateful because nowhere in it does it indicate that it's not hateful, that it's a parody of hatefullness. Instead, it tells racist and xenophobic jokes, and I'm not going to find them funny just because some immature part of my psyche hasn't yet completely overcome the racism and xenophobia that is the sadder part of my cultural heritage.

By: It's Raining Florence Henderson

It's Raining Florence Henderson — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:30:38 -0800

Serious question, jonmc: You say you honestly want a discussion; however your premise is that anyone in the entire world who claims not to fit into your generalization is a liar. Without arguing the point, I can't really see what you think is left to discuss since you've preemtively dismissed any possible counterpoint. 1) You are a racist 2) Am not 3) Now you're a racist liar 4) Troll 5) See? What do you have against Trollish-Americans? /okay - mostly serious question

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:31:14 -0800

Harping on that fact comes across as an excuse to do nothing, a recipe for paralysis. That may be how it comes across, but I can assure you my intent is the opposite. Like I said, I seek to lower the emotional and accusatory level of the race/ethnic/gender/whatever debate, since nothing ends rational discussion quicker than accusations of prejudice. I could be wrong or misguided, but it's an idea I've had for a while.

By: I Foody

I Foody — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:32:18 -0800

Really uneven, more misses than hits. Being over the top racist can be funny but it is still only one joke. He repeats the same joke virtually every sentence because there is so little insight in most of his observations. Including "boy" with racial slurs applied to blacks is funny in a way that calling blacks monkeys isn't; it's somewhat novel. The problem with most of these racist jokes isn't just that they're racist but that they're old and have been old for hundreds of years. British food is bad? No shit, that wasn't news in the 60s. British people collect stupid shit? That rings as true, but it's novel. I wasn't around in the 60's so maybe the lots mexicans in the car thing was new then, but I kind of doubt it.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:32:20 -0800

I'd say to jonmc that he chould wait to find a better-written wagon to attach his populist horse to.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:33:48 -0800

It's Raining Florence Henderson: I can only say what I've seen on that score. I've yet to see any adult human completely innocent of some form of bigotry. I think accepting that makes it more difficult to scapegoat and forces us to actually get down to changing the behaviors.

By: geoff.

geoff. — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:34:07 -0800

Tommy Gnosis, conceded. Sorry if I sounded condescending. I found it funny when it didn't rely on old, over-the-top racial stereotypes such as what you highlighted above. Of course funny or not, it apparently is effective saitre as this thread demonstrates.

By: Witty

Witty — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:38:31 -0800

Maybe we could start putting together a new, more current list of racial stereotypes. Perhaps everyone would feel a little better then. Who would like to go first?

By: Marnie

Marnie — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:38:59 -0800

This wasn't even funny when Jacob Riis did it seriously in his 1890 How the Other Half Lives: "Cleanliness is the characteristic of the Negro in his new surroundings, as it was his virtue in the old. In this respect he is immensely the superior of the lowest of the whites, the Italians and the Polish Jews, below whom he has been classed in the past in the tenant scale. . .Poverty, abuse, and injustice alike the Negro accepts with imperturbable cheerfulness. . .He loves fine clothes and good living a good deal more than he does a bank account." Jacob Riis is a respected journalist with a bunch of parks named after him in New York. This might be a parody of his ethnographic b.s. But still not funny.

By: I Foody

I Foody — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:41:41 -0800

Witty, seems to me like Jewish girls love to knit ugly things.

By: ibmcginty

ibmcginty — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:42:09 -0800

nothing ends rational discussion quicker than accusations of prejudice. True enough, jonmc, and the "all humans stereotype" fact is worth bringing up, especially among those, typically left-leaning, who are prone to let loose with that accusation. That said, this thread is a somewhat suboptimal place to defend that point of view against all comers. The Africans and Indians stuff is creepy and unfunny, even tho intended to be satire.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:42:16 -0800

Maybe we could start putting together a new, more current list of racial stereotypes. Spike Lee did in Do The Right Thing. Remember that set of speeches that began with "Garlic breath, Lasagna eating, spaghetti bending..."

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:42:40 -0800

Minnesotans like cassoroles that combine marshmallows and cocktail weenies. They also talk funny.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:42:53 -0800

sometimes, what people expect of others can be revealing i have to go to work ... bye

By: I Foody

I Foody — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:46:28 -0800

Detectives sweat too much and love to complain about the weather even when its sunny. They tend to have thick eye brows and beat their wives if they aren't gay. They talk like slow witted children that grew up watching "Nell" everyday. The best thing about detectives is that they sometimes wear disguises that obscure their ugly faces.

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:47:20 -0800

I Foody wins.

By: dios

dios — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:49:18 -0800

I'm with jonmc. This is somewhat funny stuff when you learn to lighten up about this kind of stuff. One can't get offended unless one thinks there is some truth to these kind of descriptions. Once one understands the joke that these are shorthand ignorant generalizations that are patently false, one can see the humor in the piece. Everyone makes prejudiced assumptions about The Other, so once you admit that, you can then set about showing how laughably silly those prejudices are. Japanese Good Point: Frequently commit suicide. Now that is funny. And it would be funny as a "good point" for anyone category of people one "dislikes." The cultural artifact of hari kiri just makes it all the more funny.

By: bardic

bardic — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:49:57 -0800

jonmc, why can't you just speak for yourself? I can respectfully disagree with your self-fashioned roughneck authenticity on race and politics (because it's dumb and obvious), but realize that having ideals and not meeting them every waking moment is part of life. Yes, many "white liberals" are hypocrites, but don't you think it's a good thing that in many parts of America telling racist jokes can get you ostracized, if not fired? I'd call that a step up, with many more to go. Your disillusion with it all doesn't make you special or interesting.

By: rodney stewart

rodney stewart — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:53:06 -0800

You're either part of the problem, or you're a fucking liar. oh i get this meme. if you could only acknowledge yourself as racist (i.e. admit that you are so irreversibly flawed in that respect) then you're more likely to overlook/forgive the same shortcoming in others. sounds awfully like to the familiar bnp 'common ground' pub meme trodden to death by 30-something barstool philosophers in suburban 80's britain. even when taken with a lager or two it didn't sound too convincing then, i have to wonder what really prompted this turd chestnut back into mass circulation. and here of all places.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:53:43 -0800

jonmc, why can't you just speak for yourself? I never claimed to speak for anyone else. but don't you think it's a good thing that in many parts of America telling racist jokes can get you ostracized, if not fired? Depends on the joke, depends on the context. Your disillusion with it all doesn't make you special or interesting. I never claimed it did.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:55:47 -0800

if you could only acknowledge yourself as racist (i.e. admit that you are so irreversibly flawed in that respect) then you're more likely to overlook/forgive the same shortcoming in others. No. If you acknowledge your own prejudices your less likely to get accusatory and judgemental of the prejudices of others, thus if we all acknowledge our guilt, we can discuss the problem less emotionally and maybe make progress. Howw many times do i have to say it?

By: bardic

bardic — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:56:48 -0800

dios, you're in fine form today. People who didn't find this shit funny are the true racists? Dear lord. You have read about "scientific" approaches to race studies in the 19th century, right? That stuff about Africans and Indians used to be quite true, in a relative sense. And it's pretty sick to find that funny. What pyramid termite said. Don't smear the rest of the world just because your own viewpoints are limited and/or regressive. Racism will probably never go away, but that doesn't give anyone license to not try and fight it, or worse revel in it.

By: Witty

Witty — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:58:14 -0800

Howw many times do i have to say it? Once more for whites, twice for Arabs and three times for blacks.

By: solid-one-love

solid-one-love — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:59:00 -0800

Your disillusion with it all doesn't make you special or interesting. I suspect that nothing does. My take on it is that O'Rourke is actually being racist and culturally elitist and that he actually holds many of the beliefs in the article; he has certainly shown enough elitism, mean-spiritedness, narrowmindedness and abject stupidity in his other works. And he's never been subtle, sensitive or ironic enough to pull off the "no, look, I'm making fun of the horrible people I'm imitating" schtick. As for myself, I'm racist and try not to be. I spent much of my childhood on a First Nations reserve and had to put up with sloth and anti-white bigotry the likes of which I have never seen since. I now live in a part of town where I might be one of a dozen white folks within a dozen blocks, where I take my life into my hands every time I try to cross the street because of the number of people out Driving While Asian. I have prejudices. We all do. There's nothing hypocritical about trying and failing to overcome them while denigrating others who are even more prejudiced than you are.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:59:23 -0800

Racism will probably never go away, but that doesn't give anyone license to not try and fight it, or worse revel in it. Better that we should treat it superstitiously, like fundie Christians treat Satan? Bigotry is not a monster under the bed, it's a learned behavior. You don't fight it merely be incantating the right words. It requires engagement, not just accusations.

By: SweetJesus

SweetJesus — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:00:41 -0800

Time for my Brooksian Generalization. There are two types of people in this world, those who can look past the surface of a racist joke to see the inherent absurdist humor of trying to be as vile, dirty and racist as possible in-order to poke fun at human traits of fear and xenophobia, and those who are distracted by the shiny surface covering of racism, and can't get past it for whatever reason. If you acknowledge your own prejudices your less likely to get accusatory and judgmental of the prejudices of others, thus if we all acknowledge our guilt, we can discuss the problem less emotionally and maybe make progress. That's wishful-thinking charm-school bullshit if I've ever heard it... Then again, I like to consider myself a realist with a deeply cynical streak.

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:02:39 -0800

"How many times do i have to say it? Once more for whites, twice for Arabs and three times for blacks." [this is funny]

By: bardic

bardic — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:03:32 -0800

jonmc wrote: I never claimed to speak for anyone else. You don't have to claim anything--you do it in any thread involving race or politics. You, the great maestro of blue collar wisdom, has been to the horrid mountain of liberal hypocrisy and seen how dreadful and gullible self-styled white liberals are. You do this all the f'ing time. To repeat my earlier suggestion, speak for yourself. Some people try to make a difference. They often fail. They often do it for un-Kantian reasons. But they seem to threaten your insular knee-jerk reactionism, so you lump them all together. It's tired.

By: nofundy

nofundy — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:03:33 -0800

I don't believe in the existence of race. Race is a social construct used to oppress groups of people. It isn't real. Even if there are many who do believe in it. Like Santa Claus. How can one be even a bit racist if they do not believe in race? I do believe in socioeconomic discrimination (class wars?) and poor people historically are the losers. Like what's going on right now in America. The poor are getting poorer, the middle class is getting squeezed and the rich are getting way richer. Wanna buy a politician? On sale this week! Contact former associates of Abramoff for more information. K street lobbyists are crying 'cause they've lost the Delay machine and Mean Dean won't play ball with them! How sad. Poor corporations and the wealthy who own them.

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:03:44 -0800

SweetJesus, I have no problem with humor that uses racist imagery to mock racism. I see no evidence that this is an example of that sort of humor. All I see is a wash of hate masquerading as humor.

By: Rothko

Rothko — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:05:58 -0800

It requires engagement, not just accusations. posted by jonmc at 2:59 PM EST on December 28 [!] I engage it by being offfended. We deal with our demons our own way.

By: Elim

Elim — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:06:02 -0800

"Aren't we all? I say better to throw all the stereotypes and prejudices on the table rather than the banal faux-politeness we're all practicing." No I think not. Because we ought to be a bit more adult, about it, and insulting folks on this level is abhorrent and beneath contempt. If being polite and not offending your friends, neighbors and strangers offends you then good, be offended. Yes we all have preconceived notions about others, most probably wrong, but it IS considered POLITE not to voicethem AT THE EXPENSE of others, I guess some can't or won't understand that. Seems to me I hear a lot of hateful insults followed by, "But I kid" and "Its a joke, Can't you take a joke?", like its the listeners fault for being insulted. THAT is a fucking childish copout and we all know it. Frankly Jonmc, Geoff, I though better of you.

By: ibmcginty

ibmcginty — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:06:06 -0800

Better that we should treat it superstitiously, like fundie Christians treat Satan? Bigotry is not a monster under the bed, it's a learned behavior. Two reasons to treat racism with quasi-superstitious aversion: (1) history of racism and its still-open wounds and legacy; (2) racism is more than a learned behavior-- it is natural as pie to the human brain. We're hard-wired for generalization and racism. So it's worth hyper-stigmatizing it to overcome it. Also, Witty's comment was hilarious.

By: hatchetjack

hatchetjack — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:07:18 -0800

I for one think it is funny as shit, which may or may not make me a racist. But if I am, it is ok because I have a license to be racist. I work in affirmative action and much like 007 has a license to kill, I have a license to disparate treatment. "....tanned, athletic penis"

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:08:02 -0800

Some people try to make a difference. Pin a rose on them. But what if their efforts are ineffective or even make things worse? Should I refrain from criticism. They often fail. They often do it for un-Kantian reasons. But they seem to threaten your insular knee-jerk reactionism, so you lump them all together. It's tired. I never read Kant, so I don't know what you mean by that. But, you know nothing of my life, so you're in no position to call me insular. I don't believe in the existence of race. No offense, nofundy, but isn't that a belief you had to come to consciously? Which means that at some point you belived in the existense of race. Probably unconcsiously, but just the same.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:09:45 -0800

I engage it by being offfended. We deal with our demons our own way. Fair enough. But does your offense do anything to change the person who offended you? Because that (along with legalities and educating the young) is part of the battle, too. (I'm not accusing. merely asking the question)

By: It's Raining Florence Henderson

It's Raining Florence Henderson — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:12:22 -0800

jonmc: But if absolutely everyone is guilty of bigotry, without exception, in the entire human race, then racism must be an inherent trait. Which suggests there really is no long term "changing behaviors." I have (at least) two problems with that premise: 1) I don't concede that the universal cognitive pattern-matching form of "pre-judging" which might support your argument is really equivalent to "bigotry," which presumes a natural superiority. I think it is possible to feel loyalty to one's own demographic without demonizing everyone else. 2) I don't concede that your (or my) anecdotal evidence is sufficient to represent a meaningful sampling of possible human experience. Discuss.

By: SweetJesus

SweetJesus — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:15:15 -0800

I don't believe in the existence of race. Race is a social construct used to oppress groups of people. It isn't real. Even if there are many who do believe in it. Like Santa Claus. Where are you getting your pot from, and can I have some?

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:15:54 -0800

But if absolutely everyone is guilty of bigotry, without exception, in the entire human race, then racism must be an inherent trait. Which suggests there really is no long term "changing behaviors." Or it's enviornmental, and we're all more or less in similar enviornments. (I actually believe it springs from inborn fear of the unknown, enviornmental pressures, and political manipulation, but eplicating those ideas is for better minds than mine.) I don't concede that your (or my) anecdotal evidence is sufficient to represent a meaningful sampling of possible human experience. Absolutely, but that dosen't mean we shouldn't share them if we think they might be illuminating.

By: dios

dios — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:16:02 -0800

The concept of race doesn't exist. It belongs to our pre-scientific vernacular. If we were re-writing our lexicon today, we would not employ such a term. I don't believe in race, so I'm certainly can't be a racist. But I see the humor in this as it is a condemnation of close-minded prejudice. It is a lampooning (hint, hint "National Lampoon") of absurd generalities and prejudices; one laughs at a person thinking that way. One doesn't laugh with that person at the other races. I would disagree with jon that everyone is a racist; only completely ignorant people are because they are the ones who believe the concept of race exists. But everyone is prejudiced. Hell, many people here are prejudiced against me. But all of us have our prejudices. Some choose race as the asinine basis for their prejudices. Some choose political ideology. Some choose sexual orientation. Some choose gender. Some choose religion. Some choose class. We all have prejudices against people we percieve as The Other. To deny that is to deny reality. To act as if their is something wrong with satirically mocking someone prejudices is to miss the point. I'm amazed that people who will say the most vile, insulting things and make gross and unfair generalizations about me or Southerners or Christians or Americans or whatever, all of the sudden get up in arms about patently absurd satire of the generalized close-minded American (a "racist"[?]/prejudiced conception that many people have about the standard American anyhow).

By: dios

dios — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:17:16 -0800

Rofl. No fundy and I agree on something. /me commits hari kiri

By: lord_wolf

lord_wolf — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:17:41 -0800

Howw many times do i have to say it? Once more for whites, twice for Arabs and three times for blacks excellently played, witty. - lord "black just for the jokes" wolf

By: bardic

bardic — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:18:58 -0800

jonmc wrote: But, you know nothing of my life Only what you post in every goddamn thread you particpate in. And I forgot that you're too good for books. My bad.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:20:08 -0800

OK, here's a depth charge: I do data entry at a music company? The other day I was entering titles from a compilation of Hawaiian Music. I remember saying to a freind "I like Hawaiians but their language has too many fucking apostrophes." and we had a laugh. Racist? Perhaps mildly, I guess. But thoughts like that are in all of us.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:21:58 -0800

And I forgot that you're too good for books. I read everyday. I spent 5 years of my life selling books for a living. I said I never read Kant. Your dislike for me is overwhelming your logic. Only what you post in every goddamn thread you particpate in. Which is of course all of it. Cool your jets, please.

By: PinkStainlessTail

PinkStainlessTail — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:24:43 -0800

And he's never been subtle, sensitive or ironic enough to pull off the "no, look, I'm making fun of the horrible people I'm imitating" schtick. Even when he was flaccidly aping his mentor, the late and brilliant Michael O'Donoghue (author of The Churchill Wit, and semi-famous for his early SNL alter-ego Mr. Mike)?

By: nofundy

nofundy — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:26:12 -0800

So dios was japanese all this time and no one knew?

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:27:35 -0800

Michael O'Donoghue was funny.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:27:48 -0800

that does explain the kamikaze posting style. (thank you. the jonmc/nofundy comedy hour will return after these breif messages)

By: Rothko

Rothko — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:28:00 -0800

Fair enough. But does your offense do anything to change the person who offended you? Because that (along with legalities and educating the young) is part of the battle, too. (I'm not accusing. merely asking the question) posted by jonmc at 3:09 PM EST on December 28 [!] I honestly don't think anything I or anyone here would say to someone like Mr. O'Rourke would change his narrow-minded views of the world, nor will I waste time trying. O'Rourke comes from a different culture than you and I, when he can hold and voice such opinions without suffering any consequences. I'm sure you understand this. Instead of holding everyone at Metafilter to blame for their innate racism, I'd be interested to see if you can go after people like O'Rourke with as much energy.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:30:08 -0800

O'Rourke comes from a different culture than you and I, when he can hold and voice such opinions without suffering any consequences. I'm sure you understand this. What culture is that? And what makes you so sure either of us truly inhabit a different one? Instead of holding everyone at Metafilter to blame for their innate racism, I'd be interested to see if you can go after people like O'Rourke with as much energy. I have and often still do. But I question how effective it actually is.

By: Rothko

Rothko — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:32:49 -0800

The concept of race doesn't exist. It belongs to our pre-scientific vernacular. And with one massively uninformed stroke, Dios erases a useful chunk of medical research being done even today. Lucky for us, he's here to warn us about our tax dollars going to the racist scientific community.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:32:52 -0800

(and the O'Rourkes (putting aside the actual debate over him personally, for the purposes of argument I'll stipulate to what ever you'd like, or let anyone substitute the egregious bigot of their choice) of the world are but one facet of bigotry. There's a much larger swath of people who are fundamentally decent at core yet still hold bigoted or simply wrongheaded beliefs. These people can be changed I (possibly naively) belive, and I question how much our reflexive indignation helps that)

By: dios

dios — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:34:05 -0800

To criticize O'Rourke for this would be to suggest that he believes it. Why would you criticize a satire writer for the thing that he is satirizing?

By: rodney stewart

rodney stewart — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:34:28 -0800

medical research my arse. jonmc and everybody else in the 'everyone's naturally racist' club needs to slow up a tad with the inbreeding and get with a darker or lighter skinned person once in a while. i think that's the real problem here.

By: solid-one-love

solid-one-love — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:34:35 -0800

Even when he was flaccidly aping his mentor I am unfamiliar with said work, but it's fair to read comments like mine as "never, in my experience".

By: Elim

Elim — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:35:46 -0800

"But everyone is prejudiced. Hell, many people here are prejudiced against me." No true, most here who have an opinion about you are, driven to that opinion by your comments here, not preconceived, prejudice: An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts. Most here I think I can safely say, have formed an opinion of you afterhand. Race as a social construct exists, much like Class and religion. it Exists, so there that fact was simple to establish... race; A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical Traits and/or Dialect. See simple, if we can define it then it exists, at least socially. Yes some here have preconceived notions about Christians, (All though Mine lean toward Christian fundamentalists). Christianity on a whole is a worthy and kind religion, although in this country (US) I see very little of what I would expect from true Christianity and I comment as much when I can. That and considering how much Christianity ( in what every form) is taking more of a role in defining America I feel free and honor bound to point out my likes and dislikes about it. When it no longer controls me then I will shut up. If that offends some then oh well. So be it. One chooses a faith, one chooses a car, one chooses a political party. One does not choose gender, ethnicity, birthplace or even a place to live in some cases, nor a primary language. So I limit any comments on those issues for the most part, (Except Jersey which I hate for more visceral reasons). al these are a personal choice, I understand results may differ from one person to another. As far as My commenting on Dios, or Jonmc or others I respond to what I see and or read. and as it is a text post, we can't make to many preconceived notions about folx here.

By: solid-one-love

solid-one-love — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:35:58 -0800

To criticize O'Rourke for this would be to suggest that he believes it. Why would you criticize a satire writer for the thing that he is satirizing? Because there's little evidence that he's satirizing and some evidence that he isn't.

By: Rothko

Rothko — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:36:45 -0800

What culture is that? And what makes you so sure either of us truly inhabit a different one? Don't be obtuse. The rich and powerful can do and say what they like, and that's a good reason why someone can be offended by this article. This wasn't written by, say, someone like Studs Turkel (and if it was, that writer's career would have been over long ago).

By: scheptech

scheptech — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:36:50 -0800

All I see is a wash of hate masquerading as humor. All I see is a comedy enema. Sort of a get-it-out-of-yer-system thing. Some may benefit from this procedure. Fine, enjoy. For most us however, like a real enema, maybe we actually feel a little worse for it rather than better?

By: Rothko

Rothko — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:39:48 -0800

To criticize O'Rourke for this would be to suggest that he believes it. Why would you criticize a satire writer for the thing that he is satirizing? Given his body of work and cultural mindset displayed to date in his publically-available work, it's safe to say that O'Rourke may not entirely have satire in mind here.

By: monju_bosatsu

monju_bosatsu — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:40:28 -0800

Fair enough. But does your offense do anything to change the person who offended you? Because that (along with legalities and educating the young) is part of the battle, too. The expression of offense within your peer group can change racist behavior. I disagree that people are inherently racist; instead, I believe that people are inherently conformist, and will adopt the social norms of the group in which they seek to attain status. If racist behavior is tolerated and accepted within a peer group, it becomes a self-reinforcing social norm. If, instead, peers react to a racist joker by showing offense, the joker will likely change his or her behavior. Not always, because racist behavior is the product of a confluence of factors, but I've seen it work.

By: Elim

Elim — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:43:43 -0800

I'm willing to assume it was and i'll conceived attempt at exposing internal racism, and it went horribly wrong right away, like Ted Danson's Friars Club Blackface move.

By: Elim

Elim — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:44:40 -0800

Doesn't make it funnier or right.

By: SweetJesus

SweetJesus — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:44:51 -0800

To criticize O'Rourke for this would be to suggest that he believes it. Why would you criticize a satire writer for the thing that he is satirizing? Exactly! Because there's little evidence that he's satirizing and some evidence that he isn't. I would venture a guess that the so-called "evidence" you're talking about has much more to do with your views on race than O'Rourke's... Given his body of work and cultural mindset displayed to date in his publically-available work, it's safe to say that O'Rourke may not entirely have satire in mind here. Not every conservative is a deep-down racist, Rothko. What specifically in O'Rourke's writing makes you think he's a racist? Excluding this particuar peice from 45 years ago?

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:47:34 -0800

[iI would venture a guess that the so-called "evidence" you're talking about has much more to do with your views on race than O'Rourke's...[/i] Ah. Interesting. When I respond negatively to a racist joke, it is because I am a racist, not the teller.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:49:36 -0800

jonmc and everybody else in the 'everyone's naturally racist' club needs to slow up a tad with the inbreeding and get with a darker or lighter skinned person once in a while. i think that's the real problem here. Here's a picture of me at the office Xmas party. Two of the people in that picture are my bosses, and I'm fine with that. The rest are all friends. I also reside in the most racially diverse county in the country and work in a predominatly gay area of the city. Nice try, though.

By: stinkycheese

stinkycheese — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:51:30 -0800

jonmc and everybody else in the 'everyone's naturally racist' club needs to slow up a tad with the inbreeding and get with a darker or lighter skinned person once in a while. i think that's the real problem here. I've never met jonmc, but I've been here long enough to know almost verbatim what his reply to this will be... On preview: nevermind.

By: languagehat

languagehat — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:52:17 -0800

Instead of holding everyone at Metafilter to blame for their innate racism, I'd be interested to see if you can go after people like O'Rourke with as much energy. I have and often still do. But I question how effective it actually is. ... There's a much larger swath of people who are fundamentally decent at core yet still hold bigoted or simply wrongheaded beliefs. These people can be changed I (possibly naively) belive, and I question how much our reflexive indignation helps that) And yet you don't seem to question how effective your "hey lighten up we're all racist" routine is here, or how much your reflexive chain-yanking helps. Do you think it's at all possible that on reflection you might conceivably come to the conclusion that it's doing more harm than good, causing people to dismiss whatever genuine insights you have? Just like the reflexive indignation of the people you criticize does more harm than good, in your opinion?

By: SweetJesus

SweetJesus — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:52:20 -0800

Ah. Interesting. When I respond negatively to a racist joke, it is because I am a racist, not the teller. Well, I think the diference between you and I is that I believe one can tell a racist joke and not believe it's true, and you think one can't. The Sarah Silverman Theory, if you will...

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:54:33 -0800

stinkycheese: I'm just refuting the idea that anyone who questions the prevailing wisdom on race lives in a lily-white world. alex: O'Rourke may be wealthy & somewhat powerful now, but he wasn't born to it as far as I know, and when this peice was written he was merely a comedy writer at a low-rent humor mag.

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:55:08 -0800

No, I think it's absolutely possible. I just think that this is not an example of it. Silverman's work repeatedly demonstrates that she's mocking these viewpoints, and also turns her biting humor inward. No such thing exists in this particular piece.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:55:39 -0800

And yet you don't seem to question how effective your "hey lighten up we're all racist" I'm not saying "lighten up." More "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone."

By: solid-one-love

solid-one-love — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:56:04 -0800

I would venture a guess that the so-called "evidence" you're talking about has much more to do with your views on race than O'Rourke's...[...]What specifically in O'Rourke's writing makes you think he's a racist? Excluding this particuar peice from 45 years ago? No, it has to do with O'Rourke's. And while I hate to sound like a broken record, even though I have made my own views on racism very clear in my first post to this thread, this isn't about me. Attack the argument. And to tie in your question to Rothko, neither he nor I need to provide specific evidence (nor, realistically, should we be expected to do so in the middle of the day without ready access to any of the printed works of his that he or I have read). And, yes, SJ, conservativism is a much, much stronger indicator of racism than progressivism. On preview: maxsparber has also made an interesting point.

By: solid-one-love

solid-one-love — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:59:45 -0800

Well, I think the diference between you and I is that I believe one can tell a racist joke and not believe it's true, and you think one can't. The Sarah Silverman Theory, if you will... I think what you think is wrong, because I fdon't think you have framed his argument fairly or correctly. I, for example, think that there is ample evidence that O'Rourke is a racist dink, but that Silverman is subtle, ironic and skilled enough to do the job right. On preview: I'm too slow a typist.

By: George_Spiggott

George_Spiggott — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:59:55 -0800

If you want to get O'Rourke's honest take on these issues read All The Trouble in the World. He misrepresents a lot of science and history and his positions are ill-informed and disingenous. But to the best of my recollection, he looks on the countries he visits and their inhabitants with real kindness and concern, and seems like anything but a racist. (He does get fed up with Somalia and pretty much damns them to hell in the end, but I'm not inclined to suspect racism as bewildered exasperation at what anyone would find to be an unbelievably messed-up place.) His chapter heading about overpopulation, "Not Enough of Me, Way Too Much of You" is so obviously satirical that it's hard to imagine he could simultaneously hold that view and explode it with a barb like that.

By: brain_drain

brain_drain — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:03:03 -0800

Everyone's a little bit racist Sometimes. Doesn't mean we go Around committing hate crimes. Look around and you will find No one's really color blind. Maybe it's a fact We all should face Everyone makes judgments Based on race.

By: rodney stewart

rodney stewart — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:03:40 -0800

race; A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical Traits and/or Dialect. for bible believers, obviously the dictionary's always going to be right. that's bible believer logic for you. define then please: what's the difference between a 'race' and a 'mixed-race'?

By: solid-one-love

solid-one-love — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:04:19 -0800

On the other hand, it could be that I'm prejudiced in favour of cute, funny Jewish chicks and prejudiced against unfunny stogie-chomping conservative asswipes.

By: Rothko

Rothko — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:05:00 -0800

Without his books on hand or recordings of his work on radio I can't give you specific quotes, SweetJesus. Still, I have read a few of his books some years ago and there is a thread of cultural superiority running through him that pervades past the comedy. Given the way Ivy League admissions were run as recently as 45 years ago I don't see this article entirely as a surprise or aberration.

By: Elim

Elim — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:05:23 -0800

His book, All the Trouble in the World: came off as more than a wee bit suspect, like Mencken before him, he comes off as an Apologist for Not making things better, and an Anti-intellectual's intellectual. Everytime he brings up racism, its to make fun of someone else writing or commenting on racism, not unlike what we see in Metafilter sometimes. When he makes a true point he often gets it way wrong, case in point: "If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free." (P. J. O'Rourke) That being said He is outspokenly politically incorrect, and can be downright insulting to those who disagree with him politically. Niether is a virtue.

By: Elim

Elim — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:13:20 -0800

rodney stewart: That is another social construct, where one has parentage of two or more different ethinic backgrounds. Why I had to explain this is somewhat telling. hmmmm. Today it seems common American norms dictate that it is an individuals choice wether they are of Mixed Race or not. results again vary from person to person. (not valid in New Jersey)

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:14:09 -0800

I din't know that O'Roarke is racist. However, I think that this example is him indulging in racism because he thinks it's funny, not because he wants to demonstrate how absurd it is so we can all laugh together at how silly racists are. I have yet to see any evidence to the contrary.

By: dios

dios — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:14:30 -0800

So some of you are quite certain that O'Rourke is in fact a racist and he was trying to make racist commentary that he believed in.... Well, I didn't realize that Canadians/English/Irish/Scottish/Swedish were all different "races," so I'm a little confused as how this can be considered racist to begin with. If you think O'Rourke really is this racist and is making a sincere argument in this piece in the National Lampoon magazine, the first question you are going to need to answer is what "race" is he representing and how that "race" doesn't include Canadians or English people. The "O'Rourke is being a racist and he means this stuff group" also needs to explain why a person of direct Irish lineage would be be "racist" about Irish people. And, are Israelis a race? In other words, the racist screed argument fails. That isn't what this is. Is a satirical look at closed minded prejudice with the joke being not on the people described, but on the un-stated category that is missing---the same category that the first-person voice speaks from---that is, the American voice. We are all quite well-aware of the close-minded American cant. (In fact, many people outside the US believe in the prejudiced generalization that Americans do in fact think this way, which adds another layer to the satire). And from the structure of the article and the omission of the only other group not described, it seems obvious that this a satire of the stereotypical close-minded American. Why then is there the race to label racism?

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:14:36 -0800

(not valid in New Jersey) Well, the toxic waste in Jersey has mutated everybody so much that race is pretty much irrelevant.

By: Elim

Elim — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:17:38 -0800

HA! True,

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:18:11 -0800

Obviously, for Dios' sake, I will need to start putting the word "Xenophobia" into my discussions here, as I did at the beginning. Frankly, if so much cautious interpretation, unsubstantiated by the text, is required to turn O'Roarke's piece into a satire of racism and xenophobia, rather than an example of it, than the author has failed as a satirist. However, I must commend his apologists for doing his work for him.

By: SweetJesus

SweetJesus — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:20:15 -0800

And, yes, SJ, conservativism is a much, much stronger indicator of racism than progressivism. So says you. And to tie in your question to Rothko, neither he nor I need to provide specific evidence (nor, realistically, should we be expected to do so in the middle of the day without ready access to any of the printed works of his that he or I have read). Right, no need to back up accusations. Just toss it out there, and let someone else do the research. As a satirist, I give him the benefit of the doubt that he's being, uh, satirical when he writes. You claim that he isn't, and it shows in his nebulous other writings. All I'm asking for is a concrete example. Usually when you call someone a racist you need to back it up with, uh, a fact or two. Without his books on hand or recordings of his work on radio I can't give you specific quotes, SweetJesus. Still, I have read a few of his books some years ago and there is a thread of cultural superiority running through him that pervades past the comedy. Given the way Ivy League admissions were run as recently as 45 years ago I don't see this article entirely as a surprise or aberration. Except O'Rourke didn't go to Harvard. He went to Miami University in Ohio, and grew up in the deep heart of conservative power - Toledo. But I'm sure you knew that, right?

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:22:09 -0800

" ... it could be that I'm prejudiced in favour of cute, funny Jewish chicks ... " I thought you were talking about Sarah Silverman.

By: solid-one-love

solid-one-love — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:22:28 -0800

Well, I didn't realize that Canadians/English/Irish/Scottish/Swedish were all different "races," In my first post I wrote "O'Rourke is being racist and culturally elitist". Wherever I later accuse O'Rourke of racism, one should read it as me accusing him of both. It's shorthand. Seriously, Dios, you're being either careless or disingenuous. We need not lay out every point in every post. It is a strawman to suggest otherwise by reducing the argument to one term.

By: Rothko

Rothko — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:22:41 -0800

And from the structure of the article and the omission of the only other group not described, it seems obvious that this a satire of the stereotypical close-minded American. O'Rourke is a bigot in the same way that Mark Twain was a bigot when he said, "The only good Indian is a dead Indian." Though he is an emblem of American comedy, I refuse to discount my offense at this statement because of his stature. I would give O'Rourke even less leeway given an upbringing and an intelligence level, such that he should have known better. Sorry.

By: It's Raining Florence Henderson

It's Raining Florence Henderson — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:22:49 -0800

An interesting link for those following the "is race real" debate.

By: Rothko

Rothko — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:24:48 -0800

Except O'Rourke didn't go to Harvard. He went to Miami University in Ohio, and grew up in the deep heart of conservative power - Toledo. But I'm sure you knew that, right? No, I didn't actually. I think this makes his behavior worse, though.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:25:00 -0800

O'Rourke is a bigot in the same way that Mark Twain was a bigot when he said, "The only good Indian is a dead Indian." Though he is an emblem of American comedy, I refuse to discount my offense at this statement because of his stature. Fair enough, but does your offense at him change anything? Any Indians sleeping more soundly tonight? I'm not picking on you, merely trying to make a point.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:25:33 -0800

I think this makes his behavior worse, though. How? I'm actually curious.

By: maxsparber

maxsparber — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:25:38 -0800

I am not of the opinion that we need to prove that this is a racist and xenophobic piece. I think tthe follwing sentence proves it quite nicely: "Probably not people at all. Probably some kind of monkey. They beat each other and worship bundles of sticks and mud. You can never remember the names of their countries, which have a new Main Nigger every half hour and too many snakes and bugs anyway." I am of the opinion that it is other's responsibility to prove that it is satire. Is a racist joke satire simply because you found it funny?

By: It's Raining Florence Henderson

It's Raining Florence Henderson — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:26:21 -0800

Sorry - that was supposed to link to the main page, not to favor any particular author.

By: Elim

Elim — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:26:56 -0800

Dios, again Race is a social construct based on regional background, so in answer to your question with another question, Why not Scots vs Swedes or do you need Skin tone? is Language root enough? Israelis, vs European Jews? and what is American for that matter? My folks have been here for 10,000 years plus (Admittedly that is estimated) so am I more American than you? Too Some swedes and the english are a different as asians and icelanders the same, to others Canadians are stupidly lumped as one race. ITS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT, it don't gotta have concrete rules... hell that last ones to true and make concrete rules on race were the (Removed by the GODWIN POLICE). and look where that got us?

By: solid-one-love

solid-one-love — Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:27:58 -0800

So says you. Actually, it's pretty much the definition of progressivism that says so. Note that I did not say "liberalism". Right, no need to back up accusations. No, there's no need to require backup that you know you're not going to get and then claim some kind of moral victory when you don't get the backup that you knew you weren't going to get. Your request for said evidence was dshonest, not the claim itself. Usually when you call someone a racist you need to back it up with, uh, a fact or two. Fuck that. When we have an obvious example of racism in the FPP link, nebulous supporting assertions aren't even necessary -- you need to provide a god damned peer-reviewed journal full of evidence to prove the opposite assertion. And Crash writes... I thought you were talking about Sarah Silverman. I'd be all up in that. She's a double hottie burger, hold the cheese (because with cheese, it's treyf, y'know).