The demand for racism far exceeds the supply. Therefore, people will manufacture racism.
My real issue is the MSM apologizing for him and sweeping it all under the bus or spinning it as "emotionally true" or "probably ahppened to someone else (but we can't prove it)". He should be raked through the coals just like Oprah did with Frey.
Minhaj's true crime? Ensuring the people he lies about suffer for his imagined slights. According to the New Yorker story, he used an actual photo of the woman in the doorstep story in his act and now she gets threats. When confronted about it, Minhaj didn't care.
The biggest problem with all this trauma porn is that it's a cold slap in the face to the literally millions of people worldwide who suffer genuine and truly traumatic violence, exploitation, and oppression every day. We've never even heard of most of them, and we never will, because they are too poor, too powerless, or too dead to tell us their stories.
Our entire culture today celebrates victimhood, real or imagined. If real, it should be rectified, not celebrated. If imagined, it should be shunned. But as you said, there’s too much to be gained by being a victim these days.
The sad reality is that Leftists will embrace anyone who tells them things they want to hear, no matter how unlikely those lies are. They embraced Jussie Smollet, despite the fact that anyone with an ounce of sense instantly saw the gaping holes in his story.
Stephen Colbert invented the perfect word to describe Leftists' relationship with convenient lies: "truthy." As long as something is "truthy"--that is, it serves the Leftist narrative for it to be true--Leftists don't consider it a lie.
The lies are questionable, but exaggeration is almost expected from comedians. It’s the faux victimhood. There is something creepy and narcissistic about fabricating stories in which you are the victim.
Guys like Minhaj are given a spotlight and beloved by the left only as long as they're useful against the right - ask Aziz Ansari how that works out long-term. What is given will be taken.
Meanwhile guys like Saagar Enjeti over at Breaking Points, Vivek Ramsworthy, and especially Akaash Singh are making a strong case for republican capture of the Indian American masculine culture. They will be here in 20 years because they've built their own platforms. I'll throw Nickki Haley in there too, I hate her neocon politics but her clashing at the debate really jumped her up a peg or five. Patrick Bet-David is Iranian but he's working in the same model.
I really like Akaash on Flagrant 2- he's everything Minhaj is not. He's most comfortable holding court on a multiracial podcast where the jokes pull no punches and Alex Jones is a welcome guest. Dude is damn proud to be Indian and needs absolutely no help or pity in the cultural arena, and he's a killer on standup. The Times didn't know what to make of him but he'd be a good FP or Honestly interview.
He made money by being a bigot. He trafficked in hate and prejudice but he a willing audience of elites who loved the fact that he justified their hatred and contempt for Americans. He is an evil man and his audience is culpable in his crimes.
This is the new genre of progressive 'comedy.' Like Kathy Griffin's graphic and violent images of President Trump's severed head. It's a guilty pleasure, but progressive audiences eat that stuff up.
The truth is that life feels less authentic, less meaningful, without a little suffering. So, when people have it too good, they seek out stories of suffering so that they can vicariously experience the full range of the human experience. There is nothing wrong with this impulse when the consumer knows its a fantasy, but people respond with real life action when they think they have just learned about real life events. Disgraceful.
Making people feel uncomfortable by being creepy has replaced making people laugh. The show 'The Office' best illustrates the phenomena. Comedy is hard. Being creepy is much easier. Even the late night guys who used to be funny now bleat woke dogma and the audience eats it up- but it's not comedy.
If media in general is subject to lies, fabrication, facts unspoken, exaggeration, bias, and an overriding interest to appeal to unblinking eyes and not thinking brains - why the hell would we expect anything more from a third rate comedian of whom 99% of Americans couldn’t name once seen?
- Bigotry these days is mostly boring, subtle, and not suited for stories on stage or screen. Is adaption/addition/subtraction of reality ok to highlight a larger truth? If it's in the context of comedy, does that change the equation? Would it negatively impact the value of the show if the performer gave a disclaimer? See the quote in The New Yorker article from Marc Maron.
- Minhaj seems to have a goal of highlighting a larger truth. What if the small bits of banal reality don't add up to the larger truth? How close does it need to be? The gap should be investigated. He doesn't seem to follow where reality points, instead he seems to interpret reality with the larger truth assumed. See confirmation bias - but this is a little different, more like confirmation bias construction.
- I wonder if he would agree that overt and soft bigots, from individuals to governments, make up their own larger truth to validate their morally dubious actions. Is it acceptable to do the same to combat a a false larger truth? This is starting to sound like a definition of wartime propaganda. If we zoom out, where does that leave us? With half truths and narratives that don't match our own lives, but we now have a more distorted lens to interpret life through. I find that when people's minds have calmed, the banal reality slaps down the exaggerated reaction. But that takes time and a resistance to stoke the fire.
- The phrase "emotionally true" is an oxymoron and should be replaced. I understand the concept the phrase is trying to describe, but using the word "true" is a grave misnomer. It grants emotions/anecdotes/bias the same validity as empirical truth. It's not truth, it's reality distorted through our imperfect feelings.
This revelation tarnishes my trust in Minhaj and other comedians that blur the line of comedy and personal stories. I'll probably watch his next special but I'll listen for jokes, not truth. Which makes sense for a comedy special, doy.
The demand for racism far exceeds the supply. Therefore, people will manufacture racism.
My real issue is the MSM apologizing for him and sweeping it all under the bus or spinning it as "emotionally true" or "probably ahppened to someone else (but we can't prove it)". He should be raked through the coals just like Oprah did with Frey.
Minhaj's true crime? Ensuring the people he lies about suffer for his imagined slights. According to the New Yorker story, he used an actual photo of the woman in the doorstep story in his act and now she gets threats. When confronted about it, Minhaj didn't care.
The biggest problem with all this trauma porn is that it's a cold slap in the face to the literally millions of people worldwide who suffer genuine and truly traumatic violence, exploitation, and oppression every day. We've never even heard of most of them, and we never will, because they are too poor, too powerless, or too dead to tell us their stories.
Our entire culture today celebrates victimhood, real or imagined. If real, it should be rectified, not celebrated. If imagined, it should be shunned. But as you said, there’s too much to be gained by being a victim these days.
The sad reality is that Leftists will embrace anyone who tells them things they want to hear, no matter how unlikely those lies are. They embraced Jussie Smollet, despite the fact that anyone with an ounce of sense instantly saw the gaping holes in his story.
Stephen Colbert invented the perfect word to describe Leftists' relationship with convenient lies: "truthy." As long as something is "truthy"--that is, it serves the Leftist narrative for it to be true--Leftists don't consider it a lie.
The lies are questionable, but exaggeration is almost expected from comedians. It’s the faux victimhood. There is something creepy and narcissistic about fabricating stories in which you are the victim.
What a lying piece of shit.
Loved this line, not sure who tunes into comedy that doesn’t make you laugh…well actually I guess I am sure:
“the kind of comedian Minhaj is, which is to say, the kind who is not particularly funny.“
“Ah, well: this country is so racist, or sexist, or full of sexually depraved weirdos who want to secretly turn every kid into a trans-cat”
———————————————————
Surveys are showing around 25% of children have adopted a *sexual* identity. A total of 9 unarmed Black men were shot by the cops.
So one of these problems is fake and the other one is a real problem you are dishonestly trying to depict as fake.
Guys like Minhaj are given a spotlight and beloved by the left only as long as they're useful against the right - ask Aziz Ansari how that works out long-term. What is given will be taken.
Meanwhile guys like Saagar Enjeti over at Breaking Points, Vivek Ramsworthy, and especially Akaash Singh are making a strong case for republican capture of the Indian American masculine culture. They will be here in 20 years because they've built their own platforms. I'll throw Nickki Haley in there too, I hate her neocon politics but her clashing at the debate really jumped her up a peg or five. Patrick Bet-David is Iranian but he's working in the same model.
I really like Akaash on Flagrant 2- he's everything Minhaj is not. He's most comfortable holding court on a multiracial podcast where the jokes pull no punches and Alex Jones is a welcome guest. Dude is damn proud to be Indian and needs absolutely no help or pity in the cultural arena, and he's a killer on standup. The Times didn't know what to make of him but he'd be a good FP or Honestly interview.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/04/arts/television/akaash-singh-apu-the-simpsons.html
He made money by being a bigot. He trafficked in hate and prejudice but he a willing audience of elites who loved the fact that he justified their hatred and contempt for Americans. He is an evil man and his audience is culpable in his crimes.
This is the new genre of progressive 'comedy.' Like Kathy Griffin's graphic and violent images of President Trump's severed head. It's a guilty pleasure, but progressive audiences eat that stuff up.
The truth is that life feels less authentic, less meaningful, without a little suffering. So, when people have it too good, they seek out stories of suffering so that they can vicariously experience the full range of the human experience. There is nothing wrong with this impulse when the consumer knows its a fantasy, but people respond with real life action when they think they have just learned about real life events. Disgraceful.
Making people feel uncomfortable by being creepy has replaced making people laugh. The show 'The Office' best illustrates the phenomena. Comedy is hard. Being creepy is much easier. Even the late night guys who used to be funny now bleat woke dogma and the audience eats it up- but it's not comedy.
If media in general is subject to lies, fabrication, facts unspoken, exaggeration, bias, and an overriding interest to appeal to unblinking eyes and not thinking brains - why the hell would we expect anything more from a third rate comedian of whom 99% of Americans couldn’t name once seen?
I don’t care. Does anyone else?
I’m waiting for Oprah to confront the greatest liar of our times, Joe Biden. I know I’m dreaming.
My takeaways:
- Bigotry these days is mostly boring, subtle, and not suited for stories on stage or screen. Is adaption/addition/subtraction of reality ok to highlight a larger truth? If it's in the context of comedy, does that change the equation? Would it negatively impact the value of the show if the performer gave a disclaimer? See the quote in The New Yorker article from Marc Maron.
- Minhaj seems to have a goal of highlighting a larger truth. What if the small bits of banal reality don't add up to the larger truth? How close does it need to be? The gap should be investigated. He doesn't seem to follow where reality points, instead he seems to interpret reality with the larger truth assumed. See confirmation bias - but this is a little different, more like confirmation bias construction.
- I wonder if he would agree that overt and soft bigots, from individuals to governments, make up their own larger truth to validate their morally dubious actions. Is it acceptable to do the same to combat a a false larger truth? This is starting to sound like a definition of wartime propaganda. If we zoom out, where does that leave us? With half truths and narratives that don't match our own lives, but we now have a more distorted lens to interpret life through. I find that when people's minds have calmed, the banal reality slaps down the exaggerated reaction. But that takes time and a resistance to stoke the fire.
- The phrase "emotionally true" is an oxymoron and should be replaced. I understand the concept the phrase is trying to describe, but using the word "true" is a grave misnomer. It grants emotions/anecdotes/bias the same validity as empirical truth. It's not truth, it's reality distorted through our imperfect feelings.
This revelation tarnishes my trust in Minhaj and other comedians that blur the line of comedy and personal stories. I'll probably watch his next special but I'll listen for jokes, not truth. Which makes sense for a comedy special, doy.