Archives for posts with tag: comedy/jokes

Hi New Zealand,

National cares about you guys like soooooooo much. Not even kidding. I mean, I’m really relaxed about it, but we’ve been working for New Zealand heaps. You’ve seen me on the news working at denying allegations for New Zealand, working at falsifying crime stats, for New Zealand, working on loosening New Zealand’s labour laws for New Zealand, kicking people off benefits for New Zealand, ignoring scandals for New Zealand.

I think New Zealanders know that we really have New Zealand’s best interests in mind. I mean, when Paula Bennett gets the stats put to her about the number of people living in poverty who are also working (40% of those in poverty are working), compared to those on benefits, it drives her to look for ways to make changes, and drive even more people into working poverty. It’s just better that way — poverty we don’t have to pay for.

I think most New Zealanders agree with me when I say poor people should all get jobs. Because you’re 60 times more likely to be a poor if you’re not working. I know, because I am super good at maths, that’s how come I know that trickle down economics is pretty much the best kind of trickle that there is.
 

 

111019_Trickle-Down_t618

 

And rich people are definitely the right people to run economies. No conflicts of interest have arisen at any point, and definitely not in my cabinet. Not at all. If you hear any different then it’s a left-wing smear campaign and it’s all lies and I don’t want to talk about it, but I’m probably still pretty comfortable about it, you know? (Also, maybe tax cuts? Yeah, you like that don’t you, New Zealand?)

Paula knows that the best thing for the poors is work, and that’s why we’re forcing them off benefits and into work. I mean, two or more jobs at unliving wages taxed higher than everyone else with one job is at least 40% better than being a poor on the benefit, that’s just maths and junk.

I mean, at least they get out of the house and away from those hungry children they’ve got.

(Also, possibly there’ll be tax cuts if we get the benefit claimants right down. Don’t worry about homeless people, they’ll mostly be living in people’s garages where you can’t see them, and your local councils will ban the ones who turn up outside Smith & Caugheys smelling funny and making you feel uneasy and guilty about buying things — you have a right to feel as comfortable as I do about everything.)

And you really shouldn’t worry about poors turning to a life of crime to support themselves and their families. That won’t happen on my watch. And if it does, don’t worry, because I’m tough on crime. And criminals. Little known fact about my government: criminals aren’t allowed to vote anymore! Cool eh? Oh, I mean, it was on the news, but I mean, hardly important if you consider that David Cunliffe might’ve bought a bottle of wine that one time. (No new taxes!)

Yeah, tough on crime! But a sensible level of toughness. I mean, I like to call it tough love, because we’re going to make them work full-time jobs for free because we love money and privatisation, but it’s tough, because we’re making criminals work which is tough for them because they turned to crime because they were lazy and just didn’t want to get one of the many, many jobs available in our rockstar economy! After all, prison isn’t a holiday camp, it’s a business.

Anyway, as I was saying. The other thing that we really know is gonna help people find better jobs is a more competitive market place with greater flexibility. Sounds choice as eh? At the end of the day, New Zealanders just want to drink a beer and watch the All Blacks win the rugby and think about one day maybe being lucky enough to have a selfie with me. Because at the end of the day, isn’t that what matters? A Prime Minister who will front up to the hard work of PR?
 

key_hawaii

Hey, did you see me on the cover of Rugby News? I’m pretty much an honorary All Black. It’s thanks to me they won the World Cup. Really, I’m just like Richie MacCaw. Except richer obviously.

Right, like I was saying before I interrupted me, the marketplace needs competition and what better way to add that than by introducing mandatory 40-hour work weeks for prisoners, to compete with the working poor for the absolute cheapest labour possible. I think most New Zealanders agree that everyone should have to work and earn their living here. And actually I think that most prisoners will find that they’re at least 40% better off under this scheme than that other one. And I guess if they’re not then that’s cool too, because it’s not like they can do anything about it in the end. 

Oh hey, did I mention tax cuts? We’re definitely going to give you tax cuts possibly in a few years time if the economy is still rocking like the rockstar it is (and by extension also me) and maybe if Bill English isn’t a meanie. I mean, we might end up increasingly GST, but that doesn’t mean we’ve lied, because we never promised no tax increases, just no new taxes.

Anyway, you better get used to all this, because as my friends in the media like to say, it’s all over bar the shouting (I affectionately like to call them “glove-puppets of Cameron Slater” — it’s kind of an in-joke, don’t feel bad if you don’t get it — most New Zealanders don’t even care about glove-puppets).

We’ve already won. You can tell, because Kate Middleton’s pregnant again, and if that’s not a good omen for me, then I don’t know what is. Have you seen all the pictures of me with Kate and William and stuff when they came last time? We had a barbecue and some beers, right out of the bottle, roughing it, y’know, just two manly men with giant hunks of meat the size of a baby. ‘Cause I’m not sorry to be a man — in fact, if anything I’m not sorry not to be a not-man. I think I’ve made myself clear on this issue and I won’t be taking more questions unless they’re about rugby or royals, or having a beer with me, Honest John Key.

 

SONY DSC

Judith will be back after the election to be tough on crime again, since this has been something she’s allegedly been working on with Serco for ages. I mean, they might have had so many dinners over this plan, you wouldn’t believe how much Serco probably donated to our campaign as a result. But if there’s any unwisdom going on with Judith I will be sure to root it out and be publicly disappointed with it while pretty much doing nothing about it actually, you can count on me!

Don’t listen to what Winston says about Royal Commissions of Inquiry, because there’s nothing behind the curtain! It’s the same thing as a regular old Commission of Inquiry, except who appoints people, which you know, I mean, I think most New Zealanders agree that should be me. If I can’t be trusted to run my own inquiry into my own cabinet’s actions and self-regulate my own cabinet, then what does that say about self-regulation? That it doesn’t work? Another smear!

Winston’s such a liar. He lies all the time. I never lie, and I especially never lie about not lying. It’s all a left-wing smear anyway, they’re just threatened by how great I am.

Threatened by how great New Zealand is under National. I mean, it has been great hasn’t it? We’re all so much better under my fudged crime stats, my fudged employment stats and my glove-puppet media machine that helps expose important, sexy penis-in-vagina corruption like the Len-Brown type, not boring old bureaucratic political corruption like Official-Information-Act-request type. Sex scandals, not paperwork scandals unless they involve eleven-year-old letters! That’s one of National’s primary campaign promises. Also maybe tax cuts.

Obviously, we believe in working for New Zealand (especially if you’re a New Zealander in privatised prison), and trying to scare most New Zealanders about left-wing alliances.

And at the end of the day, isn’t that what most New Zealanders want? To be scared and rich, trapped in their heavily defended homes, while those nasty poors get put into privatised slavery one by one? (Oh yeah, we’re increasing military spending too. It’ll be sweet, promise.) I’m pretty sure that’s what most New Zealanders want.

Yours knowingly, confidently and totally comfortable with that,

John Key

 

PS, Here’s a picture of me with a kitten from the Whale Oil website, which you should definitely check out because it’s pretty swell.

 
prime_minister_elect_john_key_with_picton_the_kitt_1791357933

PPS, Here’s a picture I drew of my beehive. It’s got an arrow to “my office” so Jason Ede and OIA people can find it. But I think most New Zealanders understand that when I say “my office” it means I’m in Hawai’i.

 
5c510eaa3766fdeb5565

PPPS, I mentioned tax cuts eh?

 

If you are at this page, it’s quite likely because I linked you here after a conversation online. Go ahead, vent. I’m the “thought police” or this is “political correctness gone mad” or I’m a “Social Justice Warrior” (What does that make you? A Social-Justice-Warrior Warrior? Good luck with that one pal.) If this is the case, please scroll to the appropriate heading.

I want to point out a few behaviours that are not okay, and try to explain why. I’ll do this a bit through links, because a lot has been said on these topics already, so I’m going to pull from a few sources who have very eloquently said what’s the problem.

“Edgy” jokes or “There’ll be nothing left to joke about”

Hi guy (I mean this as gender-neutral if that’s alright with you). Your joke about race wasn’t funny because it was racist. A racist joke is one that plays into stereotypes about a broad category of people based on their ethnicity, where the oppressed is the butt for the joke rather than the oppressor.

Least you start whining that “political correctness” is going to ruin comedy and then we’ll have nothing to joke about, let me first point out that comedy isn’t sacred. Now, on to a non-exhaustive list of comedy styles that would not be affected were no-one ever allowed to make jokes at the expense of oppressed social groups again.

  • Black comedy
  • Blue comedy (including that which uses using sexism, racism, and homophobic views, as long as the butt of the joke is not the victim/oppressed)
  • Character
  • Cringe
  • Deadpan
  • Improvisation
  • Mockumentary
  • Non-sequitur
  • Observation
  • Satire
  • Spoof
  • Sitcom
  • Sketch
  • Slapstick
  • Surrealism
  • Wordplay/wit

Keep in mind, this does not mean you cannot make jokes about race (or rape, or whatever), it simply means it is inappropriate when the butt of the joke is the victim/survivor, or oppressed person, rather than the person doing the oppression or committing the crime, or our society, authority, or ideals. You can still do a rape joke or a race-based joke, just don’t be a dick about it.

If you’re trying to be “edgy” maybe you should find another way to do it, because this could easily go wrong. At the very least, if you’re going to make jokes about rape, as Lindy West says (she covers the rape joke controversy pretty well in my opinion), be prepared to be called out. The same goes for race. If you’re not a professional comedian, or funny person for a profession, you will very likely fuck it up (and even the pros do. All. The. Time.)

David Cross has a fairly decent joke about rape that makes fun of authority rather than victim and Louis C.K. one that is essentially about not being a rapist. The sometimes-controversial Louis C.K. gets away with quite a bit because, as West says: “[He] has spent 20 years making it very publicly clear that he is on the side of making things better. The oppressors never win at the end of his jokes.”

Trolling

When did “trolling” become an excuse for people to be outright assholes? I feel like trolling has become so accepted that we just write it all off instead of understanding that that person is being a dick. I also often feel like people use trolling as an excuse to say whatever they like and face no social consequences.

Let me be clear — if you are trolling people based on racism, gender, ableism, religion, sexual orientation, you are an asshole. You are not funny. You are perpetuating harmful ideas, and people often can not tell you don’t believe those ideas (in some cases, even you possibly).

stoppit

This excludes sarcasm and satire. Just make damn sure people know it’s sarcasm.

Reverse racism or “White people face racism too”

No. No they don’t. Any example that you try to come up with to prove your point here is not going to work. Either, because it’s going to make you look like even more of an asshole than you already are, or because it will make you look ignorant to people who know better, or both. White people need to learn the difference between someone being rude or mean to them and racism.

Racism ≠ Xenophobia

Someone simply calling you white is not racism, much like the act of describing someone as black or African American or Indian is not racist. If you follow an ethnic determiner up with stereotypes or inferences about them based on their race, yeah, that’s racism, but merely mentioning it? No, not if you have a good reason (like you’re trying to describe someone). Actually, interestingly, if you avoid mentioning race when necessary to describe someone, you might appear more racist.

Because a lot has been written and said on the topic of “reverse-racism” already, I’m going to link to a few things here.

I like this one because it’s short and succinct:

Let’s start from the beginning. Your first step is to accept that “a hatred or intolerance of another race” is not the definition of racism. The dictionary is wrong. Get over it.

Racism is when intolerance in government laws, attitudes and ideals of a society are ingrained in a culture to the point where patterns of discrimination towards a certain race are institutionalized as normal. If you keep this in mind, you’ll understand that reverse racism doesn’t — and can’t — exist.

I feel like everyone in the world has probably seen this by now, but I will add it because I think it illustrates my point perfectly:

Although I don’t 100% agree with everything said about class here, the basic concept is good:

When a group of people has little or no power over you institutionally, they don’t get to define the terms of your existence, they can’t limit your opportunities, and you needn’t worry much about the use of a slur to describe you and yours, since, in all likelihood, the slur is as far as it’s going to go. What are they going to do next: deny you a bank loan? Yeah, right.

So whereas “nigger” was and is a term used by whites to dehumanize blacks, to imply their inferiority, to “put them in their place” if you will, the same cannot be said of honky: after all, you can’t put white people in their place when they own the place to begin with.

Power is like body armor. And while not all white folks have the same degree of power, there is a very real extent to which all of us have more than we need vis-à-vis people of color: at least when it comes to racial position, privilege and perceptions.
[…]
Objectification works against the disempowered because they are disempowered. The process doesn’t work in reverse, or at least, making it work is a lot tougher than one might think.

There’s a world of resources available on this topic, so I’ll leave it here. Please educate yourself. Google (and Bing) are there for you.

Tone policing or “I would’ve listened if they hadn’t been so angry”

I’ve seen this one a lot: “It’s a shame you can’t be less emotional about this,” and its sneaky cousin “Why are you getting so upset?”

This is a tricky one. On one hand, I’d strongly encourage people to try to be more polite and understanding to each other as often as possible. This does mean that it’s a good idea to try to disengage from your emotions and try to be as nice as you can muster. This can be exhausting and confusing though … and again, it’s all about power, and who has it within existing structures.

Most of the time when I’ve seen this tactic employed, it’s a silencing tactic; it’s nasty, underhanded and manipulative. It’s usually people with privilege telling people without privilege that they’re getting their knickers in a twist and they should be reasonable.

You know what? I don’t think you’re reasonable if you expect someone whose life is impacted daily by a social problem (let’s say racism) to not react emotionally to that. And I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have feelings about things that affect you. Women get these accusations of being upset a bit more than men in my experience. Women of colour even more so ( “I’m not being racist or anything, but WOC are just angry, y’know?” No, I don’t know.)

I do think it’s unreasonable when white people think race jokes are hilarious and refuse to admit they can hurt people, tell POC (people of colour) not to get so upset. This is tone policing. This is a shitty thing to do. Maybe someone’s anger makes you uncomfortable. That doesn’t mean it’s their job to alter their feelings.

On tone policing:

Marginalized people often do not have the luxury of emotionally distancing themselves from discussions on their rights and experiences.
[…]
Tone policing is the ultimate derailing tactic. When you tone police, you automatically shift the focus of the conversation away from what you or someone else did that was wrong, and onto the other person and their reaction. Tone policing is a way of not taking responsibility for fucking up, and it dismisses the other person’s position by framing it as being emotional and therefore irrational.

I hope you have found this post helpful in some way. I apologise for the swearing. I was a bit angry. But my points were still valid.

%d bloggers like this: