According to
Wikipedia:
In satire, human or individual vices, follies, abuses, or shortcomings are held up to censure by means of ridicule, derision, burlesque, irony, or other methods, ideally with the intent to bring about improvement. Although satire is usually meant to be funny, the purpose of satire is not primarily humor in itself so much as an attack on something of which the author strongly disapproves, using the weapon of wit.
This is where I fail to see the satire. No where in the image are we shown that this bringing someone else's ideas up for ridicule. We are not clearly shown that this is something the illustrator disapproves of rather than something he fears is true. Now I think it's great to make fun of and point out the ridiculousness of this image being passed around as a scare tactic for making people vote McCain. I just believe that this image misses the mark in doing so and instead has given the right more ammunition to use against the less informed voters. The latest polls show that
12% of people still think he is Muslim, and a group called
Latinos for McCain did a recent interview proclaiming pretty much the same. Satire is good, but it needs to be clear enough that it is satire so as not to give the right something to use to scare more people to their side.
Mike Pouraryan
Comment by Anonymous
Yet, that time has now passed.
This image is about as quality as anyone would expect in the United States.
You see - I'm not so much worried about that image as I am worried about the reason as to why you're outraged by it?
The entire 2008 Election is a mockery of:
Politics.
Progressive Thought.
Humanity.
The United States.
Media.
Reason.
Logic.
Administration.
And a myriad of other things.
Lets look at our candidates:
Barack Obama: The whitest black man in the world. He has virtually no "track record" and most anyone who has studied politics a great deal has already admitted that if he wasn't black he would not be the democratic nominee.
Based purely on his political record - Obama is less qualified to run for President than a retarded 5 year old. He has gotten where is based on hype, mass appeal and the color of his skin. Sad but true.
John McCain: The only reason he's in this election is because he's the most non-republican republican that the party could muster. Which is funny since he's still pretty much on par with the rest of them.
He has no significant traits about him - constantly screws up his PR and talking points and his only real claim to fame is that somewhere in his ancient legacy of a past - he may be some kind of a war veteran or PoW or something? right? maybe he was the king of Prussia? Who really remembers these days.
----------------------------- --------------
So we have two of the most unqualified people in the world running for Office. Now lets look at their platforms:
Barack Obama: Essentially his campaign is run on the words "Change" and "Hope". He has thrown in minor inspirational phrases from time to time as well.
His campaign rallies ignorant people who are easily swayed into upbeat movements. Normally we call these "sheep".
Most of Barack's policies and plans are outlandish, impossible and generally ridiculous. They would never play out in a realistic setting, however this fact doesn't seem to stop people from "Hoping" they will.
In addition, Barack Obama DOES have a track record of voting half-heartedly for the things he promises and basically being "wishy-washy" in his votes.
So Barack Obama is offering us "Change" from total incompetence to a "fictional government" where fantastic things are promised and then usually... never happen.
John McCain: McCain's platform is Bush Lite. He understands that we're all sick of Bush and the world at large wants him quartered and drawn. So he's offering us everything Bush did but with a more refreshing, never-water-down taste.
Essentially while Barack Obama harvests the ignorant "Change" sheep, McCain is looking to gain the support of the ignorant "Don't Change" sheep who are so misinformed they think Obama is a terrorist / muslim / whatever and that he's going to rip their beliefs and traditions out from under them. Please vomit now.
Media: Is in love with this election because they have an Old War Veteran and a Young Black Senator who neither qualify to even be in this race, squaring off and constantly screwing up their campaigns.
More importantly this entire race has functioned on the same premises that the media works with. If either of the candidates had a rational plan/policy for any aspect of the Government the media wouldn't want any part of it because 99% of people wouldn't understand or care about it.
This election has produced all kinds of media friendly twists and it's all provided in an easy to digest format.
All they had to do is flash headlines like "OBAMA IS A MUSLIM!" or "MCCAIN TO DESTROY WILDLIFE!" or just the word "HOPE" in blood-red letters and the whole country goes apeshit.
Conclusion: This entire election is perhaps one of the saddest moments in our nations history and regardless of which one of these idiots wins, we lose.
However I think it speaks volumes that this is what our nation has come to, we are divided not by what we believe, or how our minds rationally and logically handle and guide the fate of our country but by simply what kinds of outlandish bullshit we can vent on.
So here you go America:
Take Your Pick:
Black Guy who's totally unqualified and basically the same as all other politicians but since he's kind of different and spews "Hope" and "Change" you hop on his bandwagon like a bunch of ignorant morons.
Or
Old white guy who's essentially promising you nothing but the past and will safeguard your dead faiths and traditions while he crusades the glory-days of a long-lost American Empire across a world we frankly don't even understand.
We're shackled and bound and yet we still waltz the dance floor to keep the illusion alive. My legs are so very tired, deliver me beyond the veil of ignorance.
Comment by Summer Minor
I am curious how you have been laughing at it for weeks and months considering it was just published this Sunday. Either you have some power of time travel, or you really don't know what you are talking about. I'm leaning towards the latter.
Comment by Anonymous
Firstly - I'm not "right wing". I'm "No-Wing" because both sides are equally pathetic. The view from above the trenches is far more absolute.
Secondly - When I said that I was laughing at it for "weeks" and "months" I was being entirely facetious. I apologize if I dipped too far into the abstract there. From this point on I will go ahead and signal you for eccentric jest with a large sign and flashing lights.
Finally, my darling dear - It is quite obvious that you are outraged "enough" to post this tidbit of nonsense on your blog. It's sufficient. You've already puked your cancerous message upon us.
You see, I'm not worried about your opinion on this matter. The New Yorker is a substandard information source from the start. So who really cares?
My fear lies in the fact that more and more I see these cry-outs. These.... festering, writhing, delusions of virtue. It is as if, every person who cries out some special interest coin is suddenly afforded the keys to heaven.
The conservatives view themselves as defenders of tradition. They are the safeguards of stability and principle.
Yet the Liberals view them as the evil, conspiring and intolerant opposition of change and progress.
Likewise, the conservatives view the liberals as short-sighted, spineless and squandering.
Yet the liberals view themselves as defenders of freedom and rights. Fairness to all.
Who is right? Nobody. Who is wrong? Nobody.
What is the truth?
The truth, is that our entire system is an elaborate network of channels and avenues by which false influence and power scales fabricated ladders based on all of the most fickle sins of man.
Here you are little sheep. Follow me beyond the veil.
Point to me here on the map and show me where the gene for democrats is? Can you tell me which chromosome makes for the best republicans?
Can you explain what Element is the founding structure of the term "Bureaucracy" ?
Of course not. All of your fiery passion and righteous vigor, be you liberal or conservative, democrat or republican is a fictional game is man's best efforts to control the sprawling filth of his kin.
And so you say here - "This is not Satire."
And why not? Because you did not find it funny? It did not perk your interest? You find it false?
Or is it because it offends that which you side with? It has targeted your candidate of choice? Or you feel like you are more righteous and correct to say that the New Yorker is the evil here?
Whatever it is that has fueled your simple post - I wonder if it is rooted in any truth at all, or simply another aspect of the fiction.
Because truly - what I have read is nothing more than wasted talent and potential on something that is essentially - human nature.
Oh dear? Did the wheel stop spinning? Did I hear a reflexive mental schism just take notice of itself within the brains of all those in ear-shot? Cute.
Comment by Jim Stillman
Political Certainty
Here in my tiny medieval village in the south of France I have to hike up the hill into the center of town to borrow some wifi. This morning, after buying some croissants and a Herald Tribune, I was passing through the town square when I saw something that stopped me in my tracks. A young, North African man was wearing a black T-shirt with an image of George Bush putting a gun to his own head.
"Kill Yourself. Save the Planet," it said in English.
Besides being illegal in the United States, the shirt turned my stomach. I'm no fan of the worst president of the United States ever, but the shirt was not only tasteless it was artless and ugly.
The current cover of [The New Yorker] is only a little better.
I consider myself a satirist myself, bridle at any and all PC constraints, and of course coming from a venerable, legendary and reliably center-left magazine, I get the intended joke, but dressing up perhaps the next president of the United States as the new millennium equivalent of Adolf Hitler is just gross and dumb.
Yes, I suppose the cover is intended as satire, to point out the absurd rumors and e-mails circulating about the Obamas. And no one in his or her right mind – perhaps an inappropriate adjective – would think otherwise. The New Yorker has published a number if insightful political pieces over the past several months, some supporting Senator Obama.
For the record, as anyone who reads my site would know, I am a liberal/progressive who will be voting for Senator Obama. I am also supportive of all political writings. But the fact remains, the cover is tasteless, artless, gross, dumb and ugly.
Comment by Summer Minor
As for being facetious, good try for a save there but the reality of what you said just does not add up. But please, do go on. Your ego seems to need a little more stroking. Throw around more big words and tell yourself just how you are so much smarter than the rest of the world. Really, we all care.
Comment by Jim Stillman
Political Certainty
Really Long Link
The cover simply is not funny -- a necessary element of good satire.
It also distracted from Senator Obama's op-ed column on Iraq published in the New York Times.
Really Long Link
Please read both pieces; they are well worth the effort.
Comment by Anonymous
Since by very definition it applies.
Go ahead, look it up. I'll wait...
Comment by Summer Minor
Go on, tell me more about how great you are. Really, I'm listening.
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
I was just simply shocked at what i saw.