The latest show on Tenacious D’s Australian tour has been postponed after senator Ralph Babet demanded the pair be deported following an apparent joke about the assassination attempt on Donald Trump.
American comedy rock duo Jack Black and Kyle Gass were due to perform in Newcastle on Tuesday evening, but the show – part of the band’s Spicy Meatball Tour – was cancelled without notice on Tuesday afternoon.
Concert promoter Frontier Touring said on social media that it regretted “to advise that Tenacious D’s concert tonight at Newcastle Entertainment Centre has been postponed”.
Video from the event showed (Kyle) Gass being presented with a birthday cake and told to “make a wish” as he blew out the candles. Gass then appeared to say “don’t miss Trump next time” – just hours after the shooting at Trump’s rally in Pennsylvania that left the former president injured.
Oh no political violence is so bad!
Go tell that the bombed out kids in Afghanistan and to all the innocents from all over the world. Cry me a river, cause I won’t shed a tear over a self proclaimed wannabe dictator. You get what you sow.
The point here is not that this comment hurts trump in some way. But that it hurts democracy. It favors violence over reason.
Many believe that the world might be better if trump was dead, but on the other side, if assassination is an acceptable solution to politics then democracy is destroyed.
The people that are against Trump are also against fascism. And supporting his murder is contradictory and essentially hurts your own cause.
Choosing to be fair and respectful to your enemy is the best course of action. Even though it might be extremely frustrating.
I don’t trust neoliberal democracy. It has killed far too many innocents all across the world, so I personally don’t care, but I understand if others do.
Happy Birthday Kyle
Keep on rockin! 🤘
Unbelievable how every right winger shows up anytime a conservative white dude “just tells a joke and gets attacked by woke” but when the shoe is on the other foot they explode like the fucking Hindenburg
I think “the shoe is on the other foot” is cutting both ways here. Read this thread, it’s filled with people defending banning people for hate speech, but the defending him here for literally asking for someone to be murdered.
Kinda like most liberals who generally scream about better gun control/laws… But are REALLY disappointed Trump didn’t take that bullet to head directly.
Oof forced af my dude
CANCEL CULTURE!!!
PS: Elon Musk and the rest of the hypocrites can stuff their opinions about how to react to assassination attempts after the way they responded to Nancy Pelosi’s husband being attacked.
I’m sure all the fans that wanted to go to the show will be very thankful to the senator for cancelling the show at the last minute for political reasons. Free speech must not be allowed in Australia
The senator didn’t cancel the show, they don’t have that sort of authority.
Obviously the senator didn’t literally cancel the show. They just made it happen by creating fake outrage.
He’s the only senator for his party UAP, no one gives a shit about him.
Shit the party he represents doesn’t even actually exist as they de-registered in 2022.
He’s jumping on outrage to get his name printed in a paper, it doesn’t mean people actually do or care what he says
Are you claiming that he didn’t help create or spread this outrage? Even if that was true, which it’s not, why would it matter when the article that this post is about points to him directly? Not sure why you’re so adamantly making this point. What’s your goal?
Yes he did not help create this outrage, as for spreading it, no more than any of the other idiots who probably shared something on social media. This nobody is not as influential as you seem to think he is.
As for why the media is mentioning it? Because making up drama sells.
My goal is to point out that they cancelled the tour themselves. And to fix your misconception about how important this politician is. This whole story would have played out exactly the same with or without Babet, in fact many news articles on this don’t even mention him.
Ok gotcha. He’s officially not very important!
Free speech isn’t a constitutional right in Australia, or in most places. Conservative voices have been blocked from Australia before. In 2019 it was that Milo guy, and I think Lauren Southern was banned from the UK?
Free speech isn’t a constitutional right in Australia
https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/rights-and-freedoms/freedom-information-opinion-and-expression
I am not very well versed in Australian law, but this indicates to me that free speech is indeed protected in Australia.
Lauren Southern was banned from the UK?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauren_Southern
She’s a far-right racist conspiracy theorist nutjob who was denied entry into the UK for spewing hatred. Her right to express herself ends where other people’s rights for freedom, health and safety begin.
I am not very well versed in Australian law, but this indicates to me that free speech is indeed protected in Australia.
It aims to, but it is not a right.
See the two exclusions on the page you linked.
blocked when…
( a ) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; ( b ) For the protection of national security or of public order, or of public health or morals.
In this case, public order may be considered valid, although my personal view is that it wasn’t.
In Australia, humour has a long history of bad taste, but a longer history of religious repression through law. Think 1960s America - that describes much of Australian rural culture, with extra bad language. (Although NSW was a lot more tolerant when I travelled around the country)
In the UK, free speech is not possible either. See D-notices, and later super-injunctions to stop media and individuals reporting on facts.
In the UK, free speech is not possible either. See D-notices, and later super-injunctions to stop media and individuals reporting on facts.
Please provide examples.
Sure, although google does the heavy lifting as I’ve given the strings.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Notice
https://www.studysmarter.co.uk/explanations/law/civil-law/super-injunction/
( a ) For respect of the rights or reputations of others
So you can’t just insult someone, that’s not bad
That’s about defamation and privacy, we have the same law in America. The First Amendment doesn’t protect defamatory speech or speech that infringes on recognized privacy rights, such as the right to self publicity, the right to be free of misappropriation of name or likeness, etc.
Hoping a shooter would have killed someone, even Trump, is - not even borderline - hate speech, I don’t get it. Jack is right. And US laws mean nothing outside US
“Hate speech” isn’t a ban on being able to vocally hate individual people.
Not that I think the concert should have been cancelled. . .but isn’t asking for someone to be killed “spewing hatred”? Isn’t asking for them to actually be shot infringing on their “health and safety.” This is “if the shoe is on the other foot” example for me, it doesn’t appear that their ban was unjustified, or her ban was unjustified. Although, it probably doesn’t even really count because we are talking about two different countries here.
Nope, see others commenting below.
And my point was, you can’t be surprised that conservatives turn around and do what the left does to them when they have the chance to. That’s why I was so against Dems ousting Trump supporters from their jobs, because I knew they would turn around and do the same if/when they had the chance.
It’s why we have to be very careful about any laws we pass when Dems are in power. Power will always swing back to Republicans at some point, and you’re fucking crazy if you think they’re not going to use those same laws to repress their political opponents
Postponed is kinda inaccurate…
- Kyle Gass’s talent agent has cut ties with him.
- Jack Black made a statement on Instagram to announce the tour’s cancellation and that any future Tenacious D projects were on hold indefinitely, stating that he was “blindsided” by what Kyle said and that he condemend any calls for political violence.
- Tenacious D were big promoters of Rock the Vote, a nonpartisan organisation dedicated to encouraging more young people to register and exercise their right to vote, to the point of planning a campus tour in partnership with them. Can’t really appear nonpartisan if you (even jokingly) wish for a presidential nominee and former US president to be assassinated.
- Black had a lot more to lose from this than Gass, since he’s the one with an actual Hollywood film career.
as always, they’re based.
i don’t think that idiot killing him would accomplish anything but don’t pretend it would’ve been a sad day if we lost a SELF-PROCLAIMED WANNABE DICTATOR.
Kyle Gass was based, not Jack. Jack Black denounced the statement, canceled the tour and put the entire duo on hiatus. Utter sellout.
I don’t think Trump’s death would solve anything.
The only positive outcome is for him to get trashed in the polls in november.,
Pragmatically it definitely would. Republicans have a fairly unpopular platform they’re running behind a demagogue. The rest of the party “stars” have the personality of a wet paper towel so hard to imagine them garnering anywhere near the enthusiasm.
It would, you don’t see people screaming “Republican Party!”, you see them screaming “Trump!”.
Ok but what would they scream if Trump was assassinated? It wouldn’t solve the hyper partisan hatred.
fascists worship whoever’s at the top. they will fall in line.
Not really, it died in Spain with Franco and in Italy with Mussolini and there was no second coming of the Nazi party in Argentina where all the officials ran to.
except the republican party isn’t any of these parties. it was fascist before him and will stay so after him. anyone who thinks one man dying will suddenly stop the republican fascist party from enacting their agenda that they’ve been working on for decades is either wishcasting or has been in a coma for the last half century.
It might not solve anything, but at least he’d be gone. We all know he isn’t going to be punished in any meaningful way for anything he’s done, so at least him being killed would mean he could no longer bring harm to anyone.
He’ll get stomped in November. Volunteer to drive people to vote, anything you can do to help others have their vote heard. Something the right works VERY hard on making sure doesn’t happen because they know if everyone votes, they lose. If you think about it, that’s the biggest problem we have. We have a minority making terrible decisions for us, because they’re just in it for the money and their sponsors, the corporations. Their voters are fools that are fueled by hatred and stupidity.
Their voters are fools that are fueled by hatred and stupidity.
Whole-heartedly agreed on this.
Perhaps this is arrogance, but I have the strongly held opinion that the vast majority of conservative voters vote against their own interests.
I agree with you 100%. They do in order to cause hurt on others. They don’t see irony either.
in order to cause hurt on others
Actually that’s not my experience. This might be a really simplistic view but in Australia it seems the left supports the working class, and the right favors the corporate class.
My parents, now in their 80s, have been firmly “working class” their whole lives, and are now retired and living on a government pension.
They’ve voted for the conservatives their entire lives simply because of conservative values around social issues. They don’t seem to realise that their preferred party is also reducing social benefits like their pensions.
I see this exact dynamic a lot. As in… “my life is so hard because there are no social services or financial support, it must be the fault of immigrants, so I’ll vote for conservatives who will be mean to immigrants and poor people, and make me feel better about my hard working self”.
Which leads me to the next category… a lot of Asian migrants are deeply conservative, and the conservative party is constantly seeking to make migration from non european countries more and more difficult. My partner is a first generation migrant from Asia, so this is something I see a lot from her and her compatriots.
That said, I guess there’s a strong undercurrent of, as you say, people just being so miserable and beat down they feel like someone must be to blame, and if a conservative govt is going to put some minority under the thumb then that might feel pretty good.
IDK. Shit is fucked.
It would definitely accomplish something. It’s not clear if that would necessarily be a positive thing, but it would definitely be a pivotal moment in history. Even just the attempted assassination might eventually be seen as pivotal.
The right-wing is full of so many contradictory forces, and right now it’s only Trump’s cult of personality that’s holding them together. It seems very likely to me that post-Trump they’re going to fracture. If Trump becomes dictator he’ll probably groom Don Jr. to succeed him, and he’ll eliminate anybody who might question that decision. But, right now, Jr. is not in a position to take over from dad, so if Trump were no longer in the picture, there would be a power vacuum and massive infighting.
But, if the assassination attempt had succeeded, there would probably have been a lot more political killings, and just violence in general.
Without a head, the body withers.
not so with a hydra
It wouldn’t be a hydra.
If you chop off a head, then 2 heads of half its size would appear.
It isn’t like the Trump base would double in size.
it’s not about the base. it’s about democratic turnout. TFG not being there would likely reduce turnout. that’s not good for the democrats.
I tentatively agree. The man himself I have no sympathy for, but an assassination of presidential nominee would have made everything even worse. GOP would get a huge boost, and could replace Trump with someone that is actually competent enough to fully implement their 2025 treason-esque bullshit. Not to mention how much that would have inflamed an already looney tunes level of political discourse.
It’s also just not how we should do things in America. Call me a hopeless patriot, but we should try to live up to the ideals we espouse.
Why does everyone say they would get a boost? Literally no one who is going to vote for Biden is going to change their vote because of that. At most it would energize the base but Republicans don’t really have an issue with that like Democrats anyway.
the problem isn’t that a replacement candidate energizes republican voters, it’s that TFG energizes democratic voters. he invokes a lot of negative partisanship. there are a lot of people who think “bOtH sIdEs aRe tHe sAmE”, but more people think so when one of the sides isn’t the orange turd, so with him gone there would likely be less turnout for democrats.
idk why people keep forgetting how unpopular he is and always was. the reason biden is getting his ass kicked in the polls isn’t because his opponent is popular. it’s because he’s giving major “died years ago and being weekend at bernie’sd through the election season” vibes.
He was shot by a conservative. Why would there be a boost? It’s not like this would be in an alternate universe where he was shot by an antifa supersoldier. If Joe Biden got shot by a Democratic loner people would think “man that’s weird”, not “we have to punish the Republicans”.
I don’t think it would prompt some kind of vindictive vote. That side of it is only going to energize those who were vehemently republican anyway. Republicans would hammer on any and all sympathy they can eke from having their candidate assassinated (regardless of the truth they will say it was the left, and at best people will think the guy was just crazy), and the average person only half paying attention will eat it up. Dems would be even more hamstrung in their rhetoric against the GOP considering the gravity of an event like that. Even with that aside, they’re now running Joe Biden against whichever face the GOP tells their voters to line up behind – who you can bet will be all in on the kind of stuff that will do even more lasting damage to our country. Biden is not a strong candidate, and without the uniquely unlikable personality and character of Trump I’m not sure there’s enough motivation amongst voters to carry him to another term.
But all of that was a lot to type, so I just said it would give them a massive boost
Crude humor from Tenacious D? I was led to believe this was a family show!
Since google puts twitter feeds at the top and that cesspit is full of idiots i decided to check lemmy to see if i was alone in thinking this is a huge over reaction.
Pretty safe to say that people of lemmy are my people.
Personally i see it as a joke, maybe one in bad taste. Maybe one that shouldn’t have been said. But a joke none the less. Its certainly interesting to see how the right react when the shoe is on the other foot.
Literally my first thought was “who the fuck cares”
Whether you find a joke funny or not, or in poor taste, or whatever… “WAAAAAH I GONNA KICK YOU OUT OF THE COUNTRY BECAUSE WORDS HURT” is not the appropriate level of response.
And besides, I thought these fucks were all about being tough, growing a thicker skin, getting over it etc
Suddenly it’s not the same when it’s one of theirs in the crosshairs this time? Or I guess iron sights, if I read correctly.
It’s ironically very against the American ideology to do what he’s doing. Free speech is kind of a big deal here. Again, ironically, the conservatives talk about this way, way more often than anyone else.
They shouldn’t kick him out of the country. They should kick him out of the band and write a song about it. And than write a song about how they got back together
Is this the same angle you took when reacting to Dave Chapelle’s recent controversies? For the record, I agree with you, I just don’t see a lot of consistency on either side when it comes to stuff like this. Jokes are one issue where “both sides are the same” isn’t too far off. People in general pick and choose what they’re offended by and can’t easily follow their own advice to let it go when the subject matter touches one of their pet issues.
Dave Chappelle was punching way down while Kyle was punching about high up as you possibly can.
You say that like “no punching down” is an unbreakable rule of comedy. Maybe in your opinion it should be but I don’t think that’s ever been true in reality, certainly not for big name comedians as a collective.
Besides, that’s only your interpretation of the situation and it requires that you assume Dave actually believes everything he says in his comedy shows which is demonstrably untrue for other subject matter he covers. You don’t assume he rapes kids even though he made a joke in that same special where that was the premise. Without that assumption there is no controversy so maybe we should stop assuming the worst about people’s intentions. That way we don’t have to concern ourselves with pointless conjecture.
Don’t get me wrong, I didn’t think much of his trans material was very funny, but that doesn’t mean I have to jump to the conclusion that he’s a piece of shit like the internet wants me to. He’s a comedian with an incendiary style which makes it quite literally his job to say stuff like that.
I don’t care if Dave believes it or not, he’s attacking people from a position of power who are at danger in our society. It’s not an unbreakable rule, but it’s the core context used when trying to decide whether it’s productive. You can say a lot of terrible things about people who are hurting and elicit a chuckle from at least some subset of the population, that doesn’t make it good (in the good for society sense) comedy.
That’s why there’s a world of difference between KG and Chapelle, and no lack of consistency in people that think KG made a harmless joke and Chapelle is contributing to a trans panic that both oppresses and endangers lives. And it’s not a mistake. There have been other comics that have had off-color sets that when confronted about them thought about it and realized it could be harmful and wasn’t really that important to keep. It’s not his job to make trans jokes and that’s a very different comedy than simply being “incendiary”.
OK, let’s assume for the sake of the argument that everything you just said is 100% correct. Why aren’t you also saying Dave Chapelle is a pedophile, or a racist, or a homophobe? Children, racial minorities, and gay men are all other groups he made jokes about and they all fit your criteria of “people at danger in our society”.
The fact that transphobic is the only descriptor I hear about that show suggests to me that this is not really the criteria you’re using to evaluate the situation, it’s merely convenient cover to give when pressed that will pacify most people. At minimum it means you’re giving those other comments a pass as jokes and choosing not to do so with his trans jokes and that is absolutely inconsistent no matter how you try and spin it.
I haven’t listened to his recent comedy to hear the context of the other horrible topics he feels are integral to his “comedy”. What were the pedophilic jokes? What were the racist jokes? What were the homophobic jokes? Was he saying the kids were asking for it? Or black people are the cause of their own discrimination? And like transphobic jokes, there’s really not much reason for him to have any material about gay people in his sets. It’s not his lived experience, so what could he possibly have to add as an insightful observation? All he has is that they make him feel weird and put upon. I’m perfectly willing to believe Dave Chapelle is bad on multiple levels, but I don’t feel any need to give him money to investigate his other work to see if I should expand my understanding of his badness.
And I didn’t mention transphobia. You did. Presumably because it’s become a news story and was the controversy you were referencing when you asked for a comparison. Which is the same reason most people know about that particular issue and don’t run down a laundry list of other critiques. It was highlighted as particularly bad.
So, people can make the whole like, oh, this is a different context, kyle is joking, whatever whatever, right, and that’s both true and a fine argument to make. But I also think when we make this like, freedom as a principle argument, right, free speech as a principle, argument, it isn’t necessarily hypocritical.
We’re just not prioritizing freedom, prioritizing free speech, as the highest possible value that trumps all other values. I think kind of by necessity, it can’t be. The idea of free speech is logically incoherent if you take it to the extreme, because you could just define speech as being anything. Harmful acts, smearing poop on the bathroom walls, whatever. So you have to put a limit on it, and then those external values are going to be what places the limit on it.
Those external values of “I agree with kyle gass” vs “I agree with dave chapelle”. Agreeing with either argument, beyond that, thinking either argument, had in the public sphere, is worthwhile, that’s what has to define the limits of speech and freedom and what has to drive the outlook on it. I might oppose the poop swastika in the rec center bathroom, but I might think the ACAB poop smear in the nazi bar bathroom is maybe okay, even if it’s a little misguided or kind of just stupid or whatever.
There has to be a core value there. It’s not necessarily hypocritical to believe that political violence can be called for, or justified against your foes necessarily, and then think that the same thing shouldn’t be done to you on the nature of your ideology strictly being better. If my foes are basically just evil, straight up, yeah, probably at the very least stop them from like, having undue economic influence, which depending on who you ask, is gonna be some form of economic violence by nature of stripping away their agency or property or whatever. That doesn’t necessarily strike me as hypocritical, or not believing in equal rights or anything, it just strikes me as pragmatic.
The first set of Dave’s trans jokes included him basically saying that while he doesn’t understand trans people, he ultimately accepts them for who they are. In that era I defended the jokes because I felt it was valid to joke about stuff as long as you ultimately aren’t trying to hurt, belittle, or delegitimize ordinary people. The follow-up jokes weren’t nearly as understanding and I no longer felt like Dave cared about much beyond being a dick. He seemed to double down on the punching down without bothering to build them back up again.
Anyway, there is a fundamental difference with Trump, in that he’s downright a fascist, so joking about his death isn’t exactly punching down. It’s more like wishful thinking.
Oh, there’s plenty of inconsistency, and I’m definitely biased, no doubt about it.
(rant ahead, feel free to skip)
Of course, I agree with KG, and it’s not really a “joke” for me.
So any answer I give you will be pretty heavily skewed.
That said, I do kind of think the DC thing was a bit overblown, but I also think he turned into a piece of shit who thinks he’s allowed to punch down on others, but you aren’t allowed to punch down on any group he’s part of. “can dish it, can’t take it” crowd.
But especially given how successful his career has been (and I fully recognize his struggle in getting started), and continued to be, his complaints fall on deaf ears.
But yeah, I don’t claim to be consistent with how I judge people’s “in the moment” things, and since the people I oppose have no concept of “consistency” (as well as them actively trying to make people like me and those I love cease to exist) I don’t really see a problem with that.
There’s no point in fighting fair when you’re facing oblivion.
And krashmo this isn’t directed at you, if anyone wants to try and tell me that “that’s not what they want”, I grew up in a pretty republican heavy area, that also attracted a lot of progressive young families, so I’ve seen more violence directed at other than I care to recount. It’s not a “maybe eventually” scenario in my head. It’s “now”.
Sorry this turned into a bit of a rant.
I get what you’re saying. I’ve got a similar background and it sounds like we have a lot in common in terms of perspective as well.
You’re right, consistency is clearly not important to the more conservative among us. That ship sailed long ago. However, that’s one of the things that I strive to be as much as possible. If one of my beliefs can’t be defended in all circumstances then I do my best to let it go, or at least recognize the fact that it’s situational and therefore not deserving of being presented as unassailable. The subject at hand is pretty inconsequential, all things considered, but I feel pretty confident in making the blanket statement that all jokes should be interpreted as such and not subject to the same scrutiny that the same statement would warrant in a different context.
Of course there are still such things as jokes in poor taste, racist jokes, mean jokes, etc. but at the end of the day a joke is what they are. It’s not a life motto or a campaign slogan it’s just something that’s supposed to make people laugh. Whether or not they accomplish that goal is largely irrelevant as long as that was the primary intent of the person who said it.
Well said.
The only point I mildly disagree with is that all jokes should be on the same level, as some things are just… Not jokes. They simply masquerade as jokes because the person telling you their views doesn’t want the potential backlash if you disagree with them.
Chapelle’s stuff strikes me as more of that.
He’s just telling us how he feels and tries to layer it with “jokes” so he can act like he’s somehow in the right and we’re the ones who just “can’t take a joke”.
That’s pretty case dependent though, and someone who knows Chapelle better than I, or even someone with a different upbringing clearly can think differently.
There’s just so much that you could actually have a comedy routine about that’s not divisive.
I dont know if this is the same. I dont agree with Kyle Gas’ joke that trump should be shot, but i do believe it was a joke and not a genuine wish for harm.
Chapelle, on the other hand, is taking a stance on gender which i disagree with. He’s not telling jokes. He is taking a position. And since i disagree with him and i find his position to be dismissive and one of erasure which i wholeheartedly disagree with, i find it very difficult to continue to watch his comedy.
In short, kyle doesnt want to hurt trump, chapelle does want to pretend trans people dont exist. So i think its fundamentally different.
If Kyle Gass came out and said, “I meant what I said, I’d have been and would be very pleased if he was killed,” would you consider the reaction justified?
If Chappelle came out and said, “I absolutely don’t wish harm on any trans people. It’s all just part of the act,” would you find his jokes acceptable?
In order of your questions.
Yes, the reaction would be justified. If he genuinely meant he wanted trump dead, despite the fact that i think trump is a trash human being who will further destroy america and cause pain and suffering to millions, i do not wish him death and any celebrity in a position of influence should not be inciting violence like trump did.
Yes, absolutely. He would have to justify a lot of things he said, but if it became clear that he was joking the entire time and that it’s just an act, then i would accept that.
So, is there any set of jokes a comedian could make that are filled with enough punching down or hateful rhetoric that you would condemn, even if the comedian was adamant they were just jokes and that he doesn’t believe anything that’s actually racist/sexist/transphobic/pro-genocide/etc?
Or is it a “no true Scotsman” thing where, if the jokes are bad enough, you just decide that he must actually mean them for real, and therefore you can condemn them out of hand?
Why does it need to go to the extreme? Are you telling me you have this all figured out theres no room for improvement in your view on morality? Im navigating this as it comes. Anything i say or have said is and should always be subject to change. And im also not willing to be the one who sets the bar here. Im not the one who decides whats ok and whats not. That is a collective thing that must be decided by society. You are too adamant in your beliefs for me to take you seriously. Its not on the individual to decide. Its up to everyone.
I would say, yes there must be a point where i would condemn a comedian based on jokes they are telling. But im still working that out.
I think intent matters. I think it is a strong factor in deciding if a joke is ok or not. To me the joke was more about kyles political leanings. I dont think he was advocating for murder. I think he was using that attempted assasination as a vehicle to state he doesn’t want trump to be president. Sure, there are better ways of saying that but if you truely belive there is no room for nuance here then i belive it is a failing on your part to understand the joke as opposed to a failure on my part to have a divine sense of morality.
You said it better than I could.
Although I’d be lying if I said I think KG is 100% joking.
If he’s anything like I want him to be (people never are) he’s not even 50% joking.
But either way, it’s a lot of BS for an off handed comment
I think your interpretation of the two situations has more to do with your political leanings than the content itself. At a basic level they are both comments made by people who get paid to make others laugh. You can assign motives to either of them that would make them more or less palatable to specific people, and it seems like you’ve chosen your path in that regard, but I don’t think it makes sense to spin one in a negative way and dismiss the other as a harmless joke. In my opinion they’re either both harmless or both intolerable. Anything less is just projection in one form or another.
But chapelle made none standup/comedy related statements about gender and trans people. Not everything is political. I dislike trump in a huge way. I think he is a horrible human being who doesn’t deserve to run a country. He will cause so much damage if re-elected. But i do not wish him harm.
I dont believe kyle does either. I’m not sure how that’s political. It’s more of a moral stance and my view on kyles moral stance.
Chapelle is transphobic, also not a political issue, even if it’s an issue that political commentators like to argue about. Gender is a social issue that has been heavily politicised, but my views on it are not related to politics.
So i dont put them both in the same camp. I dont agree with either of them, but there is clearly a difference between denying trans peoples existence outside of your comedy and making an off-hand joke on stage at a concert. Especially if you apologise for the joke instead of doubling down like dave did.
“Kyle does not wish Trump harm” and “Dave is transphobic” are both judgments that you’ve made. You’re entitled to hold those opinions but it is important to recognize that you’ve used the same kind of evidence (jokes they made) to reach opposite conclusions about the two men. You dismissed one as a joke that does not reflect the character of the speaker and used the other as indisputable evidence of a character flaw.
The fact that these conclusions line up with your own political beliefs is absolutely relevant because it helps you understand why you are doing it. It’s probably subconscious but you’re viewing the world through a distorted lens when you make inconsistent value judgments like this. Correcting those distortions and becoming more consistent is part of what it means to mature as a human being.
My belief that kyle doesn’t wish trump harm is 100% my opinion. It may be a belief i have formed through a “distorted lense”, yes, that is very possible. But to call it a conclusion is not exactly correct. I will change my belief and draw a conclusion when the evidence is presented.
My conclusion about dave is one drawn from statements made by dave. Not his jokes, not his standup. Dave has continually reaffirmed this stance, he denies the existence of trans people and repeatedly states that there are 2 genders. A line he said comes to mind “gender is a fact” its not one incident, its many. I would say to draw a conclusion based of one incident would be “distorted” but to base it on years of anti trans rhetoric is quite a clear and clean cut conclusion to draw…
This is a taste of what’s to come if Trump is reelected. Mocking Dear Leader in good taste or bad becomes a punishable offense. Freedom of Speech goes out the window, disrespecting snowflakes in office is not allowed.
Unless they’re democrats, then he can just order them to be killed.
He’s a comedian for fucks sake. He’s supposed to make jokes. Whether dark or not. I’m so tired of manufactured corporate outrage
Babet asking for deportation is not the real story - he’s just an idiot making ridiculous statements for attention.
I don’t really buy into the “just a joke” defense. There’s plenty of things one could say “as a joke” that we would and should denounce as a society, and political violence is one of them. Celebrities have a responsibility to uphold social norms or at the very least not to normalise concepts we will not tolerate as a society including political violence.
Yes, you and me can see that what was said was “just a joke” but there’s plenty of people who would hear that joke and assume that wishing Trump would be assassinated is a normal opinion.
[Jack Black][(https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-07-16/tenacious-d-trump-joke-cancel-australia-tour/104105448) has cancelled the rest of the tour, and not because of Babet’s comments, but more likely because he can’t continue with Gass.
There’s plenty of things one could say “as a joke” that we would and should denounce as a society, and political violence is…
Not one of them. Kyle isn’t a militia member calling to arms and no vulnerable people are being harmed by being irreverent about a fascist preaching violence barely missing the consequences. Don’t punch down, but do punch Nazis.
Celebrities have a responsibility to uphold social norms or at the very least not to normalise concepts we will not tolerate as a society including political violence.
What the fuck do you think comedy is about?
Well I think comedy is obviously not about assassinating politicians I don’t like, and apparently jack black agrees with me.
Thats just PR damage control. Jack Black is a very wealthy person, he just made a new kung fu panda film, his image with the public is that of an extremely friendly, kind to all humans and fans, sort of person. He doesn’t remotely fit in with a crowd that makes jokes about killing the former president. He is distancing himself from it and its what anyone in his position would do if they care more about money and fame than politics.
It has lowered my op8nion of him though. Hes not the nice guy that he presents. Hes just another rich out of touch celebrity if he follows this path. He should support kyle and defend him. His influence is stronger than kyles and could sway public opinion that kyle was 100% joking.
He is distancing himself from it and its what anyone in his position would do if they care more about money and fame than politics.
This is a post hoc fallacy. As in someone who cares more about money would distance themselves from this, but that doesn’t mean that JB cares more about money. IMO, any self respecting celebrity that doesn’t want western politics to descend into violent adversarial combat would also distance themselves from a comment like that.
kyle was 100% joking.
It doesn’t matter. As I’ve said some jokes are completely inappropriate.
Totally fair about the first comment. Its fair to say that jack black may have other reasons for trying to distance himself from it. But it was a huge decision to drop the tour and potentially the band based on one bad joke. Its got PR written all over it. But i accept that it might not be money, or at least not just about money.
Second comment is more subjective. There are many who would disagree with you.
Personally i think that if kyle, even if it was only in the moment, thought it was appropriate to make that joke then it should be taken as an indication of how scary it is that trump might become president again. That people laughed should be an indication that people dislike trump enough to not be shocked by the comment. The comments from people defending kyle should show that hatred for trump runs deep and perhaps it should be considered when determining what to do about this.
If people are ok wih a joke about killing trump then maybe people should be looking more seriously at what trump is doing and what he stands for.
Sorry mate that’s a pretty thin argument.
Someone might be challenged to reconsider after hearing a joke like that, but many millions will just think that sort of opinion is normal. It’s ok at want political opponents dead.
I’m so glad I watched that video clip that was fucking legendary. HAPPY BIRTHDAY KYLE.
Jacks a sellout. Kyle keeps it real.
I’m sure the people upset about Kyle Gass’s statement were JUST AS UPSET when Republicans joked about Nancy Pelosi’s attempted Assassination!
Yes?
We’re always joking about “facing the consequences of your actions”. Kyle is facing the consequences of his actions, why are you upset about it?
Most people think that encouraging violence is a bad thing and should be denounced, do you disagree?
There is no one-size-fits-all answer to political violence. Some portion of the populace will justify any specific violent action, and it’s up to the history books to tell us which of those were actually justifiable. I get the feeling we’d land on different sides of this one.
What does justified even mean in this context though? Are you in favour of capital punishment? Of vigilante justice?
Trump is a horrible person who, if elected, will harm the lives of very many people. I simply do not believe assassinating him is a legitimate tactic. There are so many problems inherent with political violence that I don’t even know where to start.
To me, advocating for political violence is a position detached from reality. Akin to wondering why the western world doesn’t simply declare war on Russia over their invasion of Ukraine. It may seem/be the morally correct thing to do, but the consequences of doing it are far reaching and extremely complicated.
Honestly idk what I’m trying to say other than I don’t think violence against Nazis is an effective strategy. I think it’s reactionary and short sighted and will only make the problem worse.
Serious answer: I think it’s a worrying sign of the times if anyone thinks of political violence as anything other than abhorrent. The reasons they might: he’s stacked the highest court in the land with hacks who’ve handed him immunity. He’s succeeded on the back of lies and smear tactics. So he’s killed truth and justice, and he’s just getting started. His party have gerrymandered themselves into a perpetual obstructionist role that makes a mockery of democracy.
He’s a convicted felon and Russian asset who is about to be elected president. How far can we be taken into dystopia before “abhorrent political violence” becomes “absolutely necessary revolutionary action?”
To be fair, he was encouraging accuracy, not violence. Let us not forget that a fire fighter got killed in this shooting instead of Shitstain L’Orange
Kyle is a cool guy.
How bizarre that an Australian politician is getting his panties in a twist over American politics.
I’m aware of the cultural absorption by other countries of American culture, but it really seems subordinate and pandering of politicians from other countries to emotionally invest themselves in American issues.
Almost as bad as the pandering, subservient American politicians themselves.
The fascists are infecting the whole world with their brain rot via the internet. Nowhere is immune.
The fascists were already there, they’re just not hiding anymore.
True, but they’re recruiting new members faster than before.
Are they? I haven’t read many articles about their recruitment numbers.
I feel like they’ve been steadily crawling out from under rocks, but I don’t know if the base itself is growing.
They absolutely are growing. They’re heavily targeting youth to indoctrinate, as well:
It’s influencers targeting “outsiders.” There have always been outsiders, whether in the 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s, etc. Sometimes that’s even healthy. But because that only became a source of strongly-defined “identity” and “pride,” often people in the past would grow out of it or use it productively (as a source of empathy for other outsiders) and leave only a small dedicated core group who were vulnerable to being exploited.
The difference is that now these influencers indoctrinate a vulnerable audience at the right time, and coach that audience into making alt-right talking points a part of their identity. Social media then allows those new recruits to see each other and create a community that self-reinforces.
There is no equivalent push on the left, because the left assumes that sense will eventually prevail. It was true decades ago, but now there is no reason to believe that - those indoctrinated never have to confront their doctrine, they live surrounded by it.
So yep, it’s going to keep growing. The only solution I can think of is to regulate news media to penalize lying and propaganda. That itself is nearly impossible to do right, since it will be abused by every right-wing leader if there is any opportunity.
Online extremism makes sense, and targeting the vulnerable makes sense, I’m more curious about the specific growth by numbers versus the numbers before, as far as we have them.
I’ll look into it.
So many socially progressive policies grow more popular according to general population polls, I can’t help but feel like the loud and proud conservatives are making it seem like there are more than their actually are.
Even in Europe, before Trump was a twinkle in he conservative eye, there were plenty of alt-right movements, they just weren’t socially acceptable.
I was in a tiny town in Austria one week and the bar patrons were complaining about some local fascist event/gathering that they were all embarrassed about, or so I was told.
True but now they’re all rallying behind Trump like he’s their divine leader.
It does seem like he’s tearing the traditional conservative movement apart though where they hide under rocks and bite ankles. Now they’re all just kind of naked in the wind.
It is creepy, the cult like fascination they have with such a dumb, gross rapist, but I’d rather have all the zealots comfortably exposed and openly committing fraud and getting fired for slurs then secretly planning these movements like they’ve been doing for decades.
The Murdoch empire transcends borders
In case it’s not clear to any Lemmings, Rupert Murdoch is an Australian and owns Fox News. His influence is the common thread between US and Australian conservative politics.
The Aussies have an extreme right wing thing going on and that group just absolutely fucking loves trump cuz he’s the fast-fasch king.
I remember them copying the truck convoys and other dumb American stunts.
Babet is a weird little dude. He preaches during an empty chamber and puts it on his social media as though he makes a difference about conspiracy theory enquiries.
Man everyone just gonna roll over for trump. Are we still expecting the justice system to hold him accountable?
Seems like it. Everyone is being told to stop the harsh criticisms of Trump because it’s what fueled the political violence. Dont fall for the gaslighting. He’s a fucking fascist and we should still treat him as such.
Yeah it’s normal when he calls for political violence that results in “Hang Mike Pence!” chants, but when he’s the target of it, somehow it’s now bad.
“We can’t stoop to their level!”
Meanwhile, right-wingers are happily hamstringing everyone.
It’s not stooping when all that bad shit is true
Tenacious D … ixie Chicks
I like jack black, but seriously fuck him for this and for not taking a stand against fascism.
What do you want him to do, exactly?
Not throw his partner under the bus? Go out there and be the Tenacious D we know and make rock history. Instead he cowers behind a PR statement.
Given the plain meaning of the words they said, it sounds like they want jack black to take a stand against fascism.
edit: also maybe to fuck him, that seems like a valid interpretation.
