The world needs a harsh unapologetic satirist to deflate the pretensions of modernity

what is this from?

Toast of London

Matt Berry as a struggling actor

Peterson has a dad-tier sense of humor.

also this. Too bad he'll never be relevant again

Came here to post Sammy boy. I think he will go down in history as the greatest satirist there ever was.

yea it is a shame about sam

youtube.com/watch?v=LOYlZlkgbX4

Filthy Frank

this guy

Terrible thread.

Is that Michel Houllebeque?

unironically Father John Misty

They call him Dark Child

>implying the overreliance on satire and irony is not the problem

Rome had Juvenal, Rome still fell.

What hope do we have?

This. Also here is your obligatory insult, pleb

no, it's some random guy on the internet, retard.

How do we "fix" modernity?

the absolute state of lit

People will deny Dan Harmon is our guy but he is

Kanye West

>Rome fell
lmao @ at ur life

>implying the role of satire isn't to maintain a smug facade towards normies and be able to say "I told you, people!" as they figuratively and literally get raped by the new emerging superpower.

They call him Peanut Arbuckle

Lol litteraly pretty much errthang
"Great modern art is always ironic, just as ancient art was religious", Cesare Pavese. Ion know if the quote is apocryphal, but whatever.

Sammy Guns

We had Million Dollar Extreme, pinnacle of satire.

youtube.com/watch?v=SkqbHQqLwMU

youtube.com/watch?v=Hkb-vgabexA

take it easy, man

America isn't Rome, user. We are the Visigoths.

Sam Hyde is what you are looking for, and only 10% of his content is good/decent. His career is already dead tho, he is in his early 30 and already in a dead end, truly a tragedy.

Theres this awesome guy called Stephen Colbert, definitely check him out. He absolutely rips the sh*t out of the Trump white house (or as I like to call it the 'clown house').

Maybe I'm just so cool I want to die
He is (was?) just 1/3 of MDE

Also GoGo nuts

I'm pretty certain that every candidate (i'm talking about mediatic ones. Sam Hyde for example is a perfect representative of this) that you may think of exercises the "unapologetic satirical style" better known as "politically incorrect style" to mask cynicism behind "real honesty" or "social critique". Doing the same observations that already have been made by the "conservative structural wing".
An example of this would be making fun of women, feminists, non-caucasians, disabled, unemployed, prole, etc. with the same vocabulary, the same style, the same old jokes, but this time safeguarded by the false justification of: "i'm so deconstructed myself that i'm rightfully accredited to laugh of social "tabues". While the real tabues are those that are left intact. Those that you wouldn't even think of as tabues, those that don't even need to be critiqued.
Surprisingly, the kind of comedians or "satires" that here (i'm spanish) fall into that category, have right wing, conservative (here that means amost neo-nazis), esentialist, oligiohrenics as their main follower strata collective.

we got Dril

Sam Hyde

The pretension of modernity were and still are being addressed by post-modern thinkers, writers and artists.

This is probably the most inaccurate post I have ever seen on Veeky Forums. To come away with such an interpretation of comedians like Sam Hyde as a facet of the "conservative structural wing" indicates either a complete misunderstanding of the terms you are using or simply a failure to deal with reality itself. But more likely, you haven't actually watched any of his content. I feel like we're not even living in the same planet. How in any way can Hyde's criticism of modernity be considered as passé is beyond me. If it is, name one other person who is willing to go where he goes. You can say his shtick isn't funny, and I'd agree with you in part, but to act like Hyde is regurgitating tired conservative talking points is ludicrous, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

Retard devoid of any wit whose entire popularity is owed to memes. Fucking /pol/ produces better social commentary than he does.

This must be a bait. I admit i haven't seen much of his content, just a few videos, and i draw what i say from those videos, my view might be incomplete and i might not have comprehensively submerged myself into his "profound transcendental critique of the very notion of modernity". What i've seen and heard suggests what i've written above, and reminds me too much of the "hubris" ridden comedians from my country, that pretending to do the aforementioned critique they actually strengthen the hegemonic imperant logic.
My view might be biased as i'm so tired of seeing this deceitful phenomenon here in my country.

And of course, i'm talking more of the "effect" of their activity or "what does" what they do. I'm not talking about some inner qualities of the "artist" that only the most sharp minds can reach.

>He called my bullshit out so it must be bait!
In all seriousness, I would like you to point me to which videos of his you believe "strengthen the hegemonic imperant logic." Furthermore, I don't believe his critique of modernity is profound or transcendental, but I don't have to in order to demonstrate how wrong you are. Your argument was that he, while attempting to criticize established norms, is in fact reinforcing the actual status quo. Just what do you think that status quo looks like? Where in mainstream political and cultural discourse can you criticize Jewish involvement in media, or the leitkultur's role in endorsing female hypergamy, and the overt marginalization of white males? His criticisms are an attempt to raise white consciousness, to racinate the deracinated. This is simply not the status quo in the United States. This is where you are wrong.

Harmon doesn’t satirize our pretensions of modernity, he celebrates in them.

>criticize Jewish involvement in media, or the leitkultur's role in endorsing female hypergamy, and the overt marginalization of white males
Ok, you gave yourself away, alt-right SJW. Back to the /pol/ hole you came from.

>If I call him /pol/ then he's wrong!
Git gud kid. These issues don't even have to exist for my argument to be correct, but you're too stupid to see this, aren't you? It doesn't matter if they are or are not real, the fact is that Sam Hyde is criticizing them, and that criticism is most definitely not part of the status quo, which was your argument. If I'm wrong, then prove it, brainlet.

This is what happens to your brain when you read too much Milo Yiannopoulos and Trump.
At the beginning i really tought you would go a little bit deeper than "muh white way of life" "all womyn are whores" "the jewish redpill" as i only have a really small sample of content of your beloved comedian to talk about. But the fact that you openly stated that you're an alt-right SJW confirms the reality observed here in Spain. (what i stated after Surprisingly,...).
The protests against Vietnam war reunited millions of people, The "enlightened" feminist movement reunited thousands of women at the end of 19th century, and today many feminists and "left" wing collectives protest.That doesn't mean that the old statu quo has been reverted. I assume that your impotent white failed charlotesville male screech comes from the fact that the old nationalist supremacist "honorable" "majestuous" state of the human relations and things you're defending (putting you on top even if you're a failed version of the archetype) is being threatened by a growing mass of political "opponents". What in the good Ol' Days you've been memed into believing was given for granted (women are pure, feminine, willful breeders. Males are masculine, dominant subjects. "America is great") is today being threatened by another truth. Women have been "enslaved", America was great for forcefully exploiting others workforce and resources (this is what is known as imperialism) and the people is getting aware and if they're not fighting, they're at least protesting and changing their daily lives. Obviously when the hegemonic discourse sees itself threatened it takes the postition of the victim (what an irony! they despised vulnerability and weakness and now they're manifesting those despicable qualities). If a collective wants to undermine the ACTUAL statu quo, somebody has to lose something. I'm not going to elaborate it any more, i'm not willing to invest the time and effort as i have some difficulties writting in english.
Now, go back to /pol/.

Good job completely missing his point.

>His criticisms are an attempt to raise white consciousness, to racinate the deracinated
I actually don't think i've missed any pòint.

The thing is not "criticism in itself" the relevant question is "what's being critiqued"

Holy shit dude, you are just proving my point. Read my post again. If you are seriously suggesting that criticisms of Jewish influence, attempts to awake white racial consciousness, etc. are indicative of the status quo, you are simply not living in reality. Maybe I'll chalk this up to you not speaking English very well.

I saw him mentioned on Veeky Forums before his death literally once

It's mostly you who has been missing the point for multiple posts. He's aiming at problems deeper than your /pol/ memes.

Armando Iannucci is literally the only satirist of worth these days

I think you're actually understanding the notion of "statu quo" atrociously wrong my dude. And that's what makes you think that i'm "not living in reality".
When i refer to statu quo a i'm not refering to the "most searched terms on google", "the most popular shirts this summer". What you're trying to say is that while the criticism of certain long ago stabilized issue is taking place, lets say the criticism of the male-female relations, the criticism that criticizes that new criticism summoning the old statu quo (now being criticised) is the actual criticism of the statu quo. Am i wrong?

nothing needs anything

That guy is not me. Read what I have been saying. Sam Hyde is criticizing Jewish influence, attempting to awake white consciousness, etc. The guy I was was responding to was claiming that he is, in fact, reinforcing the status quo. This is simply not true, the status quo does not tolerate such criticism, and certainly does not endorse it. I don't have to be /pol/ to be right, it's simple logic based on empirical evidence. I think you simply see the word "Jew" and have a kneejerk reaction without understanding that I am not, in fact, supporting what Sam Hyde says, simply pointing out that his criticisms are not indicative of the current status quo. Git Gud.

this should have been the only post in the thread
wtf has happened to Veeky Forums

Lad, these people think we live in a left wing conspiracy. There's no point. They think shit like phrenology or social darwinism was forcefully abandoned, not that it became outdated. They think people aren't offended by slavery or the holocaust, for example, and are just pretending so they can remove the white man's right. This is the level you're dealing with.

I'll put it simply. Are criticisms of Jewish influence and attempts to awaken white consciousness part of the current status quo, yes or no?
status quo, noun
1.
the existing state or condition.

Allow me to clarify, "His" being the poster you were replying to, not Sam.

I also think you are an utter nigger for setting up the typical /pol/ bogeyman that allows you write anything you don't like off as a foreign invasion.

What are you talking about? Where are you getting any of this from? Are you simply trying to conflate me with these other people or in order to dismiss my argument? My argument has nothing to do with the validity of these claims, simply the existence of the criticisms you absolute mong. Jesus when did Veeky Forums fill up with brainlets?

What an absurdity. You have/had the entire media and half or more of the political establishment supporting the things the guy was saying Hyde critiques. If that isn't a hegemony you have no concept of the term.

I made a question first, please answer.
It's great that you can do a google search to look for the precise meaning of terms. But when you want to have a serious debate you have to go further than the dictionary. Do we agree that "statu quo" refers to the current actual material and simbolic effective conditions of existence?.
I'm not going to enter into the controversy of the "jewish influence" as it's pretty misguiding to start with. you're actually formulating a socio-economical issue as a ethnical issue which actually doesn't have much to do with reality and just serves to the purpose of "reviving" the nationalist pride and to direct it to certain racial enemy as a threat to white supremacy. Which btw isn't anything new, the same happened during the third reich in germany.

DFW not ironically

Isn't that a good way to spend a life?

I'm not attempting to address these issues at all, retard. This is why you are wrong. When have I ever argued for anything remotely /pol/? Not once. You simply are incapable of understanding my argument, which is why there are other posters in this thread calling you a retard for missing the point.
As to you're question, it's nonsensical. You are implying that the current status quo is not, in fact, a status quo, but a criticism of some older status quo that you've vaguely defined for the purposes of your argument. That's retarded, and means you don't understand what a status quo actually is.
As for the /pol/ shit, I've explicitly stated several times that my argument is not contingent upon /pol/ shit being true or not true. What I am saying is that someone who espouses /pol/ shit, like Sam Hyde, is not part of the status quo, but instead criticizing it. I can't imagine you disagreeing with the last statement.

Well, you seem the one that's retarded as you can't get to understand that statu quo means more than "the current state of the media". I'll put it simply for you this time:
Lets say that 20th century abolitionists are getting a growing mediatic impact in USA, but slavery still exists, it's actually very present and its end is still uncertain. In this specific setting, slavery supporters begin criticizing the abolitionist growing critique. Would you say that the fucking reactionary critique of the new critique does not belong to the ACTUAL statu quo?

Lool mate, I've never said that status quo means "the current state of the media." Don't strawman. As for your seemingly illusory and meretricious definition of the status quo, I don't understand the point you are trying to make. Sam Hyde's criticisms are not part of the status quo. You can wail and stamp your feet all you want, that doesn't change the fact that your fundamental premise is flawed, because you don't understand the terms you're using. There is no point continuing a debate with you, as you don't understand your own argument, much less my argument. This could all be laid to rest if you simply answer the question of whether or not Sam Hyde's criticisms are in fact indicative of the status quo. I'm not going to respond anymore. I get the point you are trying to make, but if we define status quo as you have, as hegemonic, then criticism of Jewish influence cannot be understood as part of the status quo. As to the abolitionist argument, whatever point you were trying to make is lost in translation. Please consider what I have said, I think you'll find it answers your questions. Adios.

unironically this

and we're converting the board btw

converting it to a place where people are more uncomfortable with themselves than anything

Parker and Stone,
Mike Judge,
The guys who wrote the Fast and the Furious series

>he thinks hating jews is being le countercultural rebel

By that logic, you're suggesting that the current state of affairs is not, in fact, the status quo. The other guy is right, you are retarded.

Our society is the satire

It is

for you

hahahahaha

I'm being materialist, you're being idealist, that's the difference between us and our understanding of the notion of statu quo. If we take every fucking existing thing into consideration when talking about statu quo, kicking a stone that once rested in certain place, would be to go against the statu quo. Statu quo is for me a "general (temporary) stabilized state of the configuration of certain actors". We could say that those actors are negotiating that "stabilized state" with new actors which doesn't mean that its state has changed yet, nor that it will certainly change. Even if the specific criticism of the jewish influence is a new event, it actually serves to reinforce the order that's under negotiation.
As for the question, it's pretty clear, and the answer should be pretty straightforward. Adios!

That is what literally every writer and artist has attempted to do in the past century. It doesn't work. You would just be satiring satire.

You have the abstract thinking capabilities of a log of wood. Welcome to the debate!

Absurd mental-masturbation. The neoliberal-globalist order is the status quo. Nationalism isn't.

Sure, retard, but the capitalist system doesnt work alone, colonialism still exists, imperialism still exist. racial otherness and sameness linked to a territory still exists. What's brexit, what's Trump, what's law 155 in spain, what are fucking refugees.
This retards should really never leave Pol.

Used to be George Carlin. It would be Bill Burr if he was actually popular

dude even Hollywood blockbusters and google share your exact same racemix fag acceptance ideology, have you even looked at TV ads recently? Political correctness is big brother slave morality for consumer drones. ''radical'' leftists are but the left wing of the establishment and the HR department. The only real threat to neoliberalism is Hitlerism, unabashed, unrelenting, unmitigated, unadulterated and unreconstructed Hitlerism as expostulated in James Mason's classic SIEGE

youtube.com/watch?v=oo64nlKdA0k

I don't doubt that he's one of the more culturally aware comics of our time, but I've recently realized how much watching him and internalizing his humor has made me a bitter, sarcastic person. I can't imagine how terrible living around Sammy has to be.

nice trips but you need to stop shilling this shit

youtube.com/watch?v=xoMgnJDXd3k

There's so fucking much satire these days. Satire is pretty much all we do. Actually sincerely believing things is old hat.

/thread. lmao at all the literal pseuds itt that think 'modernity' refers to the present day

this but unironically

He quit to make sleepy jap songs though

I don't think that that user was being ironic

i think it was a joke!