We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Libertarians and humour David Sucher asks: “why are libertarians so much wittier than liberals?”
The answer is that the sense of humour comes from a libertarian understanding of the world. Statists see a world of oppression and pain, and get depressed because of global warming and evil multinationals. Libertarians see the world in a different way, seeing the bad in the world, but also seeing the great advances that humankind has experienced over the past few hundred years. They have greater confidence in humanity, progress and the future. So they can afford to not take life completely seriously. The sense of humour is profoundly libertarian. (Thanks to Madsen Pirie for giving me the idea for this post.)
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Hm, that certainly hasn’t been my experience with some self-professed libertarians in the comments section – a disturbingly large proportion seem to have had a sense of humour bypass.
You beat me to it, Gabriel. In my experience of libertarians, for every P.J. O’Rourke there seem to be a hundred shrill Randian sourpusses.
One of the reasons I hesitate to describe myself as libertarian.
Alex,
I think you are heading for a bit of libertarian overreach here. There is no connection between libertarianism and humour, nor indeed between optimism and humour. Libertarianism is just a political philosophy, it has the merit of being true, but there is no point simply arrogating sundry virtues, like being witty, to it’s advocates.
Alex
How would you explain gallows humour then?
Eamon
Well, I recently made the acquaintance of a “Randian socialist.” The kid is firmly in the same camp as that whole circle of acquaintances. (Half of them don’t own a car because cars are evil, the majority are vegans, they vow never to make the mistake of voting “Green” again, even talking about the “economy” paints you as some sort of conservative nut, to a man/woman they despise “what the country stands for”, etc.)
But this guy just read The Fountainhead, and so has what I term “Fountainhead Endorphins” dancing through his head. He likes the ideas of “not caring what other people think”, of “not being a second-hander”, of self-sufficiency, etc. But it hasn’t seemed to have made a single dent in the way he views the role of government. Oh well.
Just thought I’d throw that in here.
Anyway, along the lines of the post, Marx saw the people almost as a liability, as more mouths to feed, as a problem to be solved. Smith saw the people as the greatest positive force, resources for effecting positive change for the benefit of all (through individual self-interest).
Which would seem more likely to engender a light spirit and good tidings?
And I thought I was libertarian because I’m a pessimist… That the world is full of oppression and pain–of which some might be avoided if those damn statists would stop trying to make the place morally improving as well.
Now I see it’s all about being enthusiastic about space-travel, not about being able to buy a drink on a Sunday morning. Thanks for enlightening me.
“Randian socialist.”??????????
Who says that kid does not have a sense of humour!
Libertarians are funnier because the government and bureaucracy provide such a rich source of material for humor, satire, etc. Its one of those “you gotta either laugh or cry” things.
Liberals/statists, being verboten from questioning the inherent goodness of such government and bureaucracy, are thus depriving themselves of most of the best comic material.
I mean, come on, you can’t make up stuff like the state commission on efficiency announcing that its report will be 6 months late.
“The sense of humour is profoundly libertarian”
That was a good humoured irony…
While I think Alex’s statement is a bit of a reach, I do think that political correctness has stunted the humor of many a liberal. Much of humor is built on irony, and what is more un-PC than irony? If the joke is on the wrong race, or the wrong class, or the wrong sociopoliticaltheologiceconomic category, then the joker must clearly be heartless, or racist, or Christian, or whatever. Anyone belonging in those categories are clearly too oppressed to take a joke, and such a joke is indicative of the joker’s insensitivity to such wretched folk. And we can’t be insensitive, now, can we? That would be WRONG!
How many libertarians does it take to change a lightbulb?
One, because you can never get more than one to agree on anything.
[Libertarians] have greater confidence in humanity, progress and the future.
Ah yes. I’m about to complete a fine biography in which those same sentiments figure very prominently. The book is called “Khrushchev: The Man and His Era.” (Perhaps Nikita was a ur-libertarian.)
I think humor also depends somewhat on inflicting pain (of the mental sort). Look at the way we tend to laugh at minor mishaps that happen to others. That points out the insight in the comment about PC being humor-resistant. Too much concern over how someone else will feel (or does feel) tends to cool the laugh impulse, and thus the laugh-making impulse.
Thus, as long as libertarian views are un-PC, I think there may be something in Alex’s thesis. I don’t agree with his reasoning supporting it though.
The individuality and self-sufficientcy of libertarians is what they try to project onto others, and thus they probably expect others can handle a but of fun poked at them. Someone has to be the but, but, but… of jokes.
I’m sort of with Alex on this because libertarians are literally freer to laugh at whatever tickles their fancy!
However Gabriel and S.Weasel are right too because if one half of the comments are laughable and the other half are taking the piss – well then there would be no serious commentary…. to laugh at…
You see you’ve got to get serious – The serious is what makes the seriously funny!
Although a pint or thirteen before logging on helps 😉
Libertarians don’t seek permission to laugh.
Check out this email I received recently from some poor nut out there in cyberland:
BTW, this is the WHOLE email:
===
http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2002/09/04/perlfororacle.html
Is there no where and no length an objectivist wont go to hawk their moron theology? I mean, when it comes down to it, isn’t Objectivism simply a pursuit of money and power as expression of someone’s “worth”?
===
It was in reference to an article wot i wrote a year ago, when I was even younger and foolisher than I am now, trying to flog a book. You can peruse the article here.
Okay, not a great article, but written in a spirit of “please don’t take this seriously at home kids”. I had some interesting stuff sent to me by serious American libertarians, who know the difference between the devil and the deep blue sea, but the email above was a real nasty piece of work, from someone who may need therapy.
Borrowed from Jeremy Paxman, here’s my response to this sad nut:
===
Hi,
> Is there no where and no length an objectivist wont go to hawk their moron
> theology? I mean, when it comes down to it, isn’t Objectivism simply a
> pursuit of money and power as expression of someone’s “worth”?
I just thought you ought to know. There’s some idiot using your email address to send out obnoxious bile. You might want to get it checked out?
Rgds,
AndyD
===
I agree with Alex. Collectivists are (mostly) prissy, smug, miserable, deadheads, filled with anger, envy, poison, hatred, self-hatred, and naked images of Polly Toynbee rolling in hay meadows. Plus their theology doesn’t work, and only leads to death, misery, and human extermination, and they know this to be true. Yes, they seek to try to find the holy grail, the form of socialism which works. But only the ants have that.
This futility of their sad lives leads to many of them to write horrible poison-pen emails, such as the one above. But it’s not all of them. Some of them still retain enough humanity to retain a sense of humour. Thank God. It’s only this which gives me any hope that they’re still savable.
And some of those American libertarians which wrote to me about the article, didn’t see any humour in it, AT ALL, oh no, as John Major might say. So I don’t think we have any monopoly on humour. Just an 80% share of the market! 🙂
And where would Britain have been in WWII without a sense of humour? Spike Milligan said it was the only thing which beat the Germans, in the desert, in the end. They had operations like Ox-Head, we had operations like Nellies-Bloomers. It was only this which kept our boys, including my Catering Corps Grandad, going, when German shells burst around them.
And where would WE be, without a sense of humour? Running screaming to the hills, clutching heavy weaponry. Gotta stop going to watch Arnie films! 🙂
I’m a political mutt in that I don’t ally myself with any political ideology because I can’t find any that fits 100%. I have a different perspective on which
group(s) lack a sense of humor, probably because I don’t identify myself with one group.
I find anyone who treats their political ideology as something sacred, almost a religion, are invariably humorless bores. I’ve found people lacking the humor ‘gene’ in every political group.
I would say, however, the groups having the *most* humorless bores are the radical far left and far right. I’ve very rarely met a true far leftist/rightest with a sense of humor.
Just look at the comments section for Michael Jennings last post……are you sure that Libertarians have a sense of humour?
The commentators came down on him like a ton of bricks for stealing book recommendation cards!
Ye Gods…..
It is invariably the zealots who lack a sense of humor. The zealots of statism are the most troublesome and the most visible to us, but to suggest that our side has no zealots is to not be paying attention.
Of course we may have gotten the root post backwards. Instead of suggesting that only libertarians have humor, perhaps you were saying that anyone with humor is secretly a crypto-libertarian at heart?
I think it’s because believers in self-provision or multiple solutions (libertarians, anarchists, freemarketeers, whatever) have fewer emperors and nakedness-of-emperor are the core of the genre.
##############################
A Soviet citizen in the Brezhnev era goes to buy a car. The salesman shows him round the six different types of Lada available in the four possible colours, and they discuss the details at length. The customer agrees on the instalment plan for payments and is ready to sign.
The salesman becomes embarrassed. “There’s just one problem, comrade….” he explains awkwardly.
“What’s the problem?” the customer asks, slightly irritably.
“I’m afraid you’ll have to wait a bit…. The car won’t be ready for you to collect for – er – ten years.”
A pause follows. The customer frowns and thinks.
“Ten years?” he repeats.
“Ten years” confirms the salesman apologetically.
Then the customer asks “Morning or afternoon?”
The salesman is a bit surprised. “Morning or afternoon?? What difference does it make?”
“The plumber’s coming in the morning.”
##############################
I had a philosophy professor tell me in college that humor was a true sign of intelligence. Because humor generally is created from novel thinking and imagination. Most humor requires the humorist and his audience to suspend their beliefs and accept the absurd as true. That was twenty-three years ago, I still believe it to be true.
Humor also requires some gratitude. That ability to laugh at situtations, other people, and ouselves both good and bad because we grateful for what we have and where we are. Things could be much, much worse.
Pessimism, it seems to me, has always been the left’sAchille’s heel regarding humor. Unlike those on the right they have no satisfaction in anything even in the moment and everything must have a point. In humor and life some things just don’t have a point, they’re just damned funny. Hell, even Ted Turner’s unhappy because he is just a billionaire now and not a multi-billionaire, go figure. Things for them will never be good enough. There’s always too much poverty, too much hunger, too much wealth inequality, too many whales to save, too many people of color being denied their rights, women being denied abortions, and way too many unhappy unmarried homosexuals to see the humor in things and be a little grateful for what we have and have accomplished. For chrissakes people, we’ve even invented a flushable toilet. I am very, very grateful for this. Try to imagine yourself without one, and you lefties don’t deny you have one; because if you are reading this you have a computer and if you can afford a computer you have a flushable crapper. If you don’t your priorities in life are all fucked-up.
Life is not fair, but it is not unfair either. It just is.
And humor to the grateful rightwinger is like stink to the frenchmen; a part of their very being.
I find it highly amusing that an article extolling the libertarian sense of humor has provoked a debate on the validity of said humor.
mark: That is a fine joke. Thank you.
Liberarians believe a sense of humor is the ability to laugh about oneself. Liberals believe it is the ability to laugh about others.
Mark,
Great joke, reminded me of when I was trying to get a hip relacement!…..
“why are libertarians so much wittier than liberals?”
Are they? The impression of lefties as stiffs may come from sheer numbers, the fact that there are more prominent leftists than libertarians so one tends to notice the humor-impaired lefties more. Leftists can be humorless scolds but plenty of libertarians are humorless dorks. Zealousness and humor don’t mix well (remember the old joke: How many feminists does it take to screw in a lightbulb? A: That’s not funny). Framing the question in self-congratulatory tones of “why is our group funnier?” is not a promising way to dispel that impression. It is possible to take humor too seriously.
I think it’s time for you guys to have another party so that Perry can write funny captions for the photos. I am not joking about this.
Perhaps I was mistaken.
Perhaps I meant to ask why Australians-living-in-London are so witty.
Save the Whales!
Collect the complete set!
It isn’t that libertarians are funnier than others; it is that liberals are unfunnier than most. Liberals have a penchant for taking themselves and their beliefs too seriously, the mark according to Eric Hoffer, of the True Believer. You’ll never hear a Catholic make an earnest joke about the Virgin Mary, but Catholics, at least, confine their reverence to things religious. Liberals, on the other hand, have a belief rules on all subjects and all occasions, from cigarette smoking to allowable occupations. When you are allowed to laugh, the canned laughter comes on.
Sylvain Galineau
What is wrong with laughing at others?
As Mel Brooks put it. Tragedy is when I stub my little toe. Comedy is when you fall down a manhole and die.
Eamon
“Jesus Christ Saves Sinners…and Redeems them for Valuable Cash Prizes”
and I heard the feminist one above originally as:
Q: How can you tell a feminist is on the rag?
A: THAT’S NOT FUNNY.
Mark: your joke is a westerner’s joke about Soviet Union (mind you, nothing wrong with that). It certainly wasn’t made up by someone who ever lived in the Soviet Union… there were NO instalment plans for payments under communism! You paid cash or in kind or you got nothing…
“Libertarians don’t seek permission to laugh”
It’s a relief that the Laughing Office is not requested to deliver Laughing Permits to libertarians: Laughing Clerks wouldn’t have too much redtape to do…
Eamon, nothing wrong, just pointing out what seems to be a common preference.
Interesting Alex …
I think there are at least two answers to the question you pose.
One answer is that Hayekians generally understand the law of unintended consequences. It comes as no surprise to us, for example, that the welfare state has in fact entrapped and moronised a huge numbers of our fellow citizens – despite the good intentions of (probably most) welfare workers. We have a viewpoint that allows us to see a world full of irony – and in this sense there is a link between ideology and humour.
Another answer is that bold thinkers (from whatever end of the political spectrum) generally refuse to avoid the sacred cows. As PJ puts it: “A conservative tells you that you shouldn’t laugh at the disabled – and he may be right. But a socialist tells you that you cannot laugh at the disabled. And he is wrong – as anyone can tell you who’s heard the one about Hellen Keller falling down the well and breaking all her finger crying for help …”
What is endless love?
Helen Keller and Stevie Wonder playing tennis.
“It’s a relief that the Laughing Office is not requested to deliver Laughing Permits to libertarians: Laughing Clerks wouldn’t have too much redtape to do…”
Kodiak, man, you really need to work on your material or delivery or both, something. Phew. That one stunk up the place.
And do all you lefties always think in terms of bureaucracy. Sheesh.
As one person said about the reason libertarians have a better sense of humour is because they don’t have to always pretend they are so “turned-on” like the left.
PCism has pretty much killed humour in the US and the UK. Lest someone be offended, and they will, comedy is now flacid and boring (unless of course your are a minority and then you can slag of whites to your heart’s content).
Humour is yet another aspect of freedom. Use it or lose it.
Fair point, Gabriel. But I got it from Easterners.
However, not having a sense of humour myself, I only know about four jokes, and therefore tell them far too often.
I’m sure they are my inaccuracies which have crept into my versions of the original joke….
“Alternative comedy” is so called because it’s an alternative to “funny”.
D2D,
Glad you took the pain to respond on that one.
One thing though: I’m not a leftie.
So do libertarians have a special claim on fire, air, gravity, and water as well?
“So do libertarians have a special claim on fire, air, gravity, and water as well?”
Yes Eric, you haven’t tried the real stuff until you’ve tried the libertarian variety… The fire is hotter, the air airier, the gravity graver and water well – we’ve got it in wetter than wet, colder than ice, mountain, clear, salt, sewage, and fluffy(sorry off season for fluffy just now). So email your full credit details NOW and FOR A PRICE YOU WILL NOT BELIEVE I’ll personally make sure you receive a variety of the best for the coming year… and if you act quickly for only a 10% bonus fee I’ll even come round and make your dirt dirtier 😉