1. To quote Ecclesiastes, "there is nothing new under the sun." Political activists tend to be much the same, regardless of what era of history they live in--just look at the failed communal experiments in America in the mid-19th century.
2. One thing about the Babylon Bee is that they will actually poke fun at/satirize their actual core audience or things their actual core audience likes. I'm not sure if the Onion does that anymore, or could get away with it even if it did. I will welcome correction on this point.
Both the Onion and the Babylon Bee are often funny when (rarely) they poke fun at their own side, and hardly ever funny when (frequently) they poke fun at the other side.
‘"I tried shouting to the people on the dance floor that the roof was on fire and that they should exit the premises immediately, but they seemed unfazed by the danger," firefighter Michael Pitti said. "I just kept shouting, 'The roof! The roof! The roof is on fire!' and so forth, but they just went right on dancing, insisting that they didn't need any of our water and that we should let the motherfucker burn."’
I think you’re not giving the modern Onion enough credit. The contributors’ online presences are a brilliant performance art piece where they play the persona of annoying, dumb socialists who get annoyed at the DNC for not being anti-capitalism and pro-Mao and get really mad at like Harry Potter or Doctor Who for being racist
Also every time I open your articles from my email after reading to comment the app crashes for some reason. Idk why it’s just you, but you could say your articles are so good substack cant even contain them
This seems as good a time as any to ask. In the late 2000s, I recall seeing an Onion headline which read something to the effect of "Taylor Swift Successfully Crosses Over into Masturbation Fantasies of Non-Country Music Fans".
I am now completely unable to find this article. Did Swift's lawyers issue them with a cease-and-desist, or did I just imagine this headline?
It’s genuinely crazy to me that you even particularly noticed the “ostentatiously placed black guy”, let alone thought it was “dumb behaviour” to have him at the front of a photo. Like… what?
Do you think they should have had him at the back? What about all the other non-white people in the photo- should they have made sure that it was white people only at the front?
It’s really not those people who are being weird about race, here.
I’m imagining it, and I genuinely don’t think I would think anything of it? The photo seems to be a pretty normal demographic spread, and someone who appears to me to be of ambiguous non-white ethnicity is at the front. What’s so remarkable about that?
It strikes me as totally bizarre to call this out, as if we should all be careful to arrange photographs so as to avoid giving undue emphasis to a non-white people. How is that not just racist?
Yeah, I understood that that was what Jeff was suggesting.
There are a few black people in the photo, and people of various races. The guy in the front isn’t even definitely black, is he? He looks like he could be at least partly North African or Asian to me.
But it’s so bizarre that we are even talking about this! It’s a group of people taking a big group photo. The guy is taking the photo! What is your problem?
Again, do you think they should have arranged their photo so as to have only white people at the front? What exactly is your objection here?
I think you think I’m being intentionally obtuse here. I genuinely am not. I’m not from the USA, so perhaps this is getting lost in cultural translation, but I find the perspective of someone who could look at this photo and object to the fact there is a non-white person at the front bafflingly alien.
There is no indication whatsoever that anyone in this photo is thinking about race at all, let alone intentionally assembling themselves to present a non-white person near the front, and I think the immediate assumption that everyone else is secretly conducting themselves in this manner indicates a personally unhealthy and societally harmful obsession with race.
There are well over a hundred people in that photo, exactly one of whom is black. I dare say his prominent positioning in the frame didn't happen by accident.
My bad, I see exactly one another black person in the photo.
I still maintain it's not an accident that less than 2% of people in the photo are black and one of them was positioned so prominently in the frame. Do you think it happened by accident?
Best Onion piss-take specifically of Woke 1.0. And nothing before or after comes even remotely close.
https://youtu.be/lpzVc7s-_e8?is=Ks-QuYDlo72nrLnQ
The Onion headline on 9/11 "Holy Fucking Shit" was the only correct one
1. To quote Ecclesiastes, "there is nothing new under the sun." Political activists tend to be much the same, regardless of what era of history they live in--just look at the failed communal experiments in America in the mid-19th century.
2. One thing about the Babylon Bee is that they will actually poke fun at/satirize their actual core audience or things their actual core audience likes. I'm not sure if the Onion does that anymore, or could get away with it even if it did. I will welcome correction on this point.
Both the Onion and the Babylon Bee are often funny when (rarely) they poke fun at their own side, and hardly ever funny when (frequently) they poke fun at the other side.
A sad microcosm of our age.
https://web.archive.org/web/20180315224707/https://theonion.com/roof-on-fire-claims-lives-of-43-party-people-1819565022/
‘"I tried shouting to the people on the dance floor that the roof was on fire and that they should exit the premises immediately, but they seemed unfazed by the danger," firefighter Michael Pitti said. "I just kept shouting, 'The roof! The roof! The roof is on fire!' and so forth, but they just went right on dancing, insisting that they didn't need any of our water and that we should let the motherfucker burn."’
I think you’re not giving the modern Onion enough credit. The contributors’ online presences are a brilliant performance art piece where they play the persona of annoying, dumb socialists who get annoyed at the DNC for not being anti-capitalism and pro-Mao and get really mad at like Harry Potter or Doctor Who for being racist
Also every time I open your articles from my email after reading to comment the app crashes for some reason. Idk why it’s just you, but you could say your articles are so good substack cant even contain them
If you’re looking for some across the pond entertainment to fill the gap, I can highly recommend the Daily Mash (https://www.thedailymash.co.uk) and Newsthump (https://newsthump.com)
Thank you! Could not agree more.
Jeff: Thanks for the reminder! I'm so old I used to enjoy The Onion as a weekly newspaper ON PAPER!
I wonder if the DSA will implode like the typical Marxist organization. You know, the "when everyone is boss, no one is boss" dynamic at work.....
The "crazed Palestinian gunman" link doesn't work, but it's been archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20180314164252/https://theonion.com/crazed-palestinian-gunman-angered-by-stereotypes-1819564228/
Holy shit, it even includes the phrase "diversity is our greatest strength". In an article from '97!
Thanks — fixed!
This seems as good a time as any to ask. In the late 2000s, I recall seeing an Onion headline which read something to the effect of "Taylor Swift Successfully Crosses Over into Masturbation Fantasies of Non-Country Music Fans".
I am now completely unable to find this article. Did Swift's lawyers issue them with a cease-and-desist, or did I just imagine this headline?
The "black guy Photoshopped in" thing really happened: https://www.reddit.com/r/wisconsin/comments/1n6t2ew/25_years_ago_today_university_of_wisconsin_was/
I can pinpoint the exact moment when The Onion 1.0 succumbed to Woke 1:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/boninbough/2013/02/27/the-onion-and-the-oscars-when-real-time-goes-wrong/
“Christopher Reeve Placed Atop Washington Monument”
“Ebert Victorious”
It’s genuinely crazy to me that you even particularly noticed the “ostentatiously placed black guy”, let alone thought it was “dumb behaviour” to have him at the front of a photo. Like… what?
Do you think they should have had him at the back? What about all the other non-white people in the photo- should they have made sure that it was white people only at the front?
It’s really not those people who are being weird about race, here.
Imagine, for a moment, if that photo had been taken at a conservative gathering.
You will then understand.
I’m imagining it, and I genuinely don’t think I would think anything of it? The photo seems to be a pretty normal demographic spread, and someone who appears to me to be of ambiguous non-white ethnicity is at the front. What’s so remarkable about that?
It strikes me as totally bizarre to call this out, as if we should all be careful to arrange photographs so as to avoid giving undue emphasis to a non-white people. How is that not just racist?
Are you satire? Do you truly not understand?
I don’t think I’m failing to understand anything. If you disagree, you should say what you think it is.
A large group of white people have played the "see we know a black person" card
Yeah, I understood that that was what Jeff was suggesting.
There are a few black people in the photo, and people of various races. The guy in the front isn’t even definitely black, is he? He looks like he could be at least partly North African or Asian to me.
But it’s so bizarre that we are even talking about this! It’s a group of people taking a big group photo. The guy is taking the photo! What is your problem?
Again, do you think they should have arranged their photo so as to have only white people at the front? What exactly is your objection here?
Go with God
I think you think I’m being intentionally obtuse here. I genuinely am not. I’m not from the USA, so perhaps this is getting lost in cultural translation, but I find the perspective of someone who could look at this photo and object to the fact there is a non-white person at the front bafflingly alien.
There is no indication whatsoever that anyone in this photo is thinking about race at all, let alone intentionally assembling themselves to present a non-white person near the front, and I think the immediate assumption that everyone else is secretly conducting themselves in this manner indicates a personally unhealthy and societally harmful obsession with race.
There are well over a hundred people in that photo, exactly one of whom is black. I dare say his prominent positioning in the frame didn't happen by accident.
That’s just not true, though. Look at the photo again.
My bad, I see exactly one another black person in the photo.
I still maintain it's not an accident that less than 2% of people in the photo are black and one of them was positioned so prominently in the frame. Do you think it happened by accident?