Political Correctness

Today's College Students[*] Aren't Just Politically Correct, They're Tediously Insisting on Didactic Art Too

[*] Not all students, of course, but this Huffington Post author who admonishes Jerry Seinfeld.

|

So in an observation that's about as self-evident as the truths articulated in the Declaration of Independence, Jerry Seinfeld has griped that college audiences are too politically correct and sensitive these days (in this, he is echoing complaints made by Chris Rock and other comics). As Mediaite reports, Seinfeld appeared last night on Seth Meyer's late night show:

When Seth Meyers noted that there are more people than ever now who will "let you know you went over the line" in comedy than ever before, Seinfeld agreed.

"And they keep moving the lines in, for no reason," Seinfeld said, citing the uncomfortable feeling he now gets from his audience when he tells his joke about people who scroll through their phone like a "gay French king."

"Are you kidding me?" he asked. "I could imagine a time where people say, 'Well, that's offensive to suggest that a gay person moves their hands in a flourishing motion and you now need to apologize.' I mean, there's a creepy PC thing out there that really bothers me."

Let's stipulate that the world does not rise and fall on the needs or opinions of comics.

Let's also point out that the actual problem with campus political correctness—which seeks not simply to enforce ideological or political orthodoxy but to shut down debate and discussion via overt acts of censorship and sustained campaigns to delegitimate as racist, sexist, classist, whatever free expression and inquiry—attaches to students and faculty that are hounded into administrative hearings and/or silence. You can recognize that the university has never lived up fully to its commitment of rigorously interrogating and expanding human knowledge to appreciate that college and academia more broadly should be places that thrive on disagreements and different conceptions of what is good, true, and acceptable.

Unless, of course, you're the type of student who pens open letters like this one to The Huffington Post:

Yes, Mr. Seinfeld, we college students are politically correct. We will call out sexism and racism if we hear it. But if you're going to come to my college and perform in front of me, be prepared to write up a set that doesn't just offend me, but has something to say.

To my mind, this sort of formulation is, as Seinfeld's Kenny Bania might put it, the worst. There is nothing more conservative than insisting that entertainment be didactic and serious—that it have "something to say." That is the impulse that underwrote not just leftists influenced by the Frankfurt School—who saw mass media and frivolity as a means of controlling the masses—and reactionaries such as former Secretary of Education Bill Bennett and Attorney General Janet Reno, who wasted hours of everyone's time denouncing rap music and "violent" cable TV during the 1980s and '90s. If you believe that everything from pop songs to standup comedy needs to have deep meaning, you can't let any opportunity pass without insisting that it all send the "right" message.

To be sure, San Diego State student Anthony Berteaux also insists in his letter that, hey, he likes edgy and funny folks such as Amy Schumer and Louis C.K. and George Carlin and that Seinfeld should

Offend the fuck out of college students. Provoke the fuck out of me. We'll thank you for it later.

But this doesn't just ignore the chill that is already upon campuses when lefty feminist profs like Laura Kipnis gets dragged into Title IX hearings for writing about sex on campus in The Chronicle of Higher Education, viewings of films as mainstream and honored as American Sniper are replaced by Paddington, and students call for trigger warnings before reading The Great Gatsby. It ignores that one of the great functions of art may be to escape from the imperative that all creative expression ultimately be instructive, a totalist inperative that is every bit as dreary and detestable as Saturday morning cartoons once were.

This seems like a good place to remind the world of the existence of the late, great series Strangers With Candy ("the after-hours after-school special"), starring Amy Sedaris and a pre-Colbert Report Stephen Colbert, which suggests that life outside the thunder-dome of enforced didacticism can be pretty fucking offensive, very fucking funny, and generally and gloriously pointless:

NEXT: More Troops Headed to Iraq, Ohio Could Get Legal Pot Next, Senate Dems Offer Do-Nothing Birth Control Bill: A.M. Links

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Let’s stipulate that the world does not rise and fall on the needs or opinions of comics.

    “…you miserable piece of shit.”

    1. You gotta love how the clueless idiot sets about demonstrating Seinfeld’s point.

    2. Where’s Andrew Dice Clay when you need him?

      1. “Old Mother Hubbard
        Went to the Cupboard
        To get her poor dog a bone
        When she bent over
        Rover took over
        OOOOHHH!!
        She got a bone of her own!”

      2. I enjoyed ADC and was pissed at the feminist dogpile in the 80’s. Christ, he’d be crucified and imprisoned today for hinting that Rover might take over… Bring back Evening at the Improv!

      3. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail,,,,,,,

        ????????????? http://www.pay-buzz.com

    3. (The turn of phrase reminded me of Walter Sobchak.)

  2. I’ve seen every episode of Seinfeld several times. It’s the only TV sitcom that I’ve seen every episode of.

    So, I’ve not been around too much lately, but I couldn’t help notice that there seems to be some sort of obsession with woodchippers going on around here.

    1. You may be interested to learn that Seinfeld will be available on Hulu starting June 24th. I know I’m excited.

      1. What’s the deal with Hulu?

        1. Hulu can be very refreshing!

          1. Does it have woodchippers?

          2. Like Ovaltine?

            1. “The jar is round; it should be called ‘Roundtine’! It’s gold Jerry, gold!”

      2. I have every single episode of every season on DVD.

        1. Are they widescreen or the original 4:3 aspect ratio?

          1. 4:3 (at least all the ones I bought). I think they remastered the Blu Ray releases in 16:9.

            1. I think mine are the same, they’re 10 years old.

          2. I dunno, but they look good on my 60″ tv, they’re not in a little square box, or letter box either. But I’m not sure if I adjusted them to fit the TV or not, it’s probably been a year at least since I’ve watched them.

            1. If they’re not the remastered widescreen version then I’m not interested. Good day, sir.

              1. And you want to be my latex salesman..

              2. Widescreen is only worthwhile if the material was shot in widescreen in the first place.

                1. Yes, but my stereo speakers? they’re digital. Seriously, its awesome.

                  1. You really have to set up your sub-woofers to appreciate episodes of Seinfeld.

                2. Most of the higher budget TV shows were filmed rather than taped so releasing them in a widescreen format is possible, provided the negatives weren’t lost or destroyed after converting to tape for broadcast.

                3. Widescreen is only worthwhile if the material was shot in widescreen in the first place.

                  Which apparently it was. It doesn’t look cropped (or possibly barely cropped).

                4. Seinfeld was shot 16×9. The HD versions that play on cable look fantastic and have more information on the sides of the frame, rather than being cropped.

              3. If you remaster to widescreen, visual info is lost. Proper viewing requires they be viewed as they were shot

                1. +Arthur45

                  When you saw Seinfeld on TV back in the late 90s, you weren’t seeing it as it was shot.

                  It was shot on 35mm film, cropped and edited, and then transferred to tape so that it could be broadcast.

    2. Almost every episode is still very funny and stands up very well.

      “Kramer is driving the bus!”

      1. I still do the opposite of what I would normally do, and it’s made me HUGELY successful.

      2. ‘Who!’ doesn’t want to wear the ribbon!?

      3. WHat does Vandalay Industries export?

        Matches?

        1. Woodchippers

        2. Woodchippers

        3. Woodchippers

        4. Woodchippers

          1. And someone who was already on a list just got underlined. And highlighted.

            1. What list?

              1. What? No list…of course there is no list…

          2. That’s four counts of threatening behavior for you.

            1. It was the squirrels!!!!!

              1. Tell it to the Judge!

              2. The squirrel defense is the new Twinkie defense.

          3. You know your just making it harder to carry out the revolution via woodchipper plan by talking about so much. Now nobody is going to believe us when we tell them that sound we are walking them towards is definitely not a woodchipper.

            1. Sorry, I wasn’t around the day of the latest ‘incident’, as far as I know, so I’m still not exactly sure what is going on. I’ve only ever caused one ‘incident’ here so far, and to this day, I still don’t even know what that was all about. I was only told that I caused it. I only know that it had something to do with one Botard. Speaking of which, has anyone seen it around here since the latest ‘incident’?

              1. You need to google reason commenters and popehat.

              2. I haven’t

              3. You should probably read this: http://popehat.com/2015/06/08/…..eason-com/

                1. I did. Are any of those commenters regulars on H&R? I don’t think I recognize any of them.

                  1. Rhywun “the Dark Warlock of Hell” and Agamamon “the Firing Squad Executioner” as they are known in federal circles, are definitely regulars.

          4. My creatures are coming for you, Hyperion.

            1. I have some brewed some anti-moobz critter potions and am lying in wait.

    3. Yeah, they asked us not to talk about it.

      So, like good libertarians, we’re talking about it.

      Personally, I want MY woodchipper to be red. Maybe not at first, but…

        1. Too lazy to click on the link. I like it though. Agile Cyborg?

          1. So clicked on the link, read column, liked it. Still didn’t get to the comments where “wood chipper” was used.
            Doesn’t matter, have gleaned enough of the meme.
            Let’s face it, if you post here, they be watching you.
            Anywhose, it is now “Mexican ass sex, pot, and wood chippers”.

      1. I think we’ve been about as good about it as could be expected.

        1. I agree. I keep getting angrier with each passing moment.

          1. The government is lucky that we’re a bunch of pussies who don’t single-mindedly pursue actions that are well within our natural rights as sovereign human beings.

        1. H.E. Pennypacker, wealthy industrialist.

          1. and philanthropist, and uh…bicyclist.

          2. I remember truly laughing my ass off too many times at that show. Memorable times include the one where Jerry had to steal the marble rye from the old lady ‘let go of the bread you old bag!’

            1. One of my favorite scenes is George getting his massage from Raymond.

              1. I think it moved!

      1. Almost never airs in syndication. Get the dvds or Hulu in a couple of weeks. It’s a funny episode.

        1. I saw it aired on network for the first time about three or four years ago. Before that, I hadn’t seen it since it first aired. Very funny, indeed. No trigger warning, though 🙁

  3. But if you’re going to come to my college and perform in front of me, be prepared to write up a set that doesn’t just offend me, but has something to say.

    WTF? How about, if YOU are going to go see a Jerry Seinfeld performance, YOU should be prepared for his brand of humor.

    This might be one of the most entitled and logically backwards sentences I’ve read since…well at least Monday.

    1. This might be one of the most entitled and logically backwards sentences I’ve read since…well at least Monday

      He’s learning well. Feeling entitled and easily offended seems to be what the college curriculum is all about these days.

      You get 5 gold stars, comrade!

    2. Not that there’s anything wrong with that!

    3. Isn’t the point of Seinfeld that he doesn’t really have anything to say? I like a comedian who just makes jokes and doesn’t think he is making some profound social commentary.

        1. Exactly. While I can enjoy comedies with some drama and character development, I really prefer them without. Just be funny.

          1. Seinfeld never fell into the trap of sacrificing comedy for story development. That’s the one gripe I have with Parks & Rec (though it is still my all-time fave).

          2. Puddy was a supremely well rounded character.

      1. So not a big fan of Jon Stewart huh? You get +1000 faux dollars.

        1. So true! The Daily Show was funnier 10+ years ago before it leaned twoards being so agenda driven. Now lefties eat it up because it agrees with them.

  4. We will call out sexism and racism if we hear it.

    Whether it’s there or not.

    But if you’re going to come to my college and perform in front of me, be prepared to write up a set that doesn’t just offend me, but has something to say.

    *Humor not required.

    1. I like the ‘doesn’t offend me’ part. It is fundamentally impossible to write a good comedy set that doesn’t offend somebody. If I make a comedy set mocking fundamentalist Islam, somewhere there will be people who are outraged that I’m mocking their religion. You can’t make fun of ISIS without theoretically offending someone somewhere.

      1. Reread it, Irish. “Doesn’t just offend me,” as in it’s OK to offend me, but you can’t do it merely for a laugh. It has to have Social Relevance.

        1. But even that’s a cop out since he has unilateral authority to determine when a set has ‘something to say’ and I vaguely suspect he wouldn’t be okay if that something to say was right-wing or libertarian.

          1. Well of course. But he’s not saying “don’t offend me!”

            1. Clearly not cut from libertarian cloth.

              I revel in finding things that are offensive. Particularly in pop culture. South Park elevates itself to genius status because they are occasionally able to offend me. There is nothing more informative than learning that you had a boundary you didn’t know about. That wonderful moment of “wow, I didn’t think I could be offended by that….” is so rare. I find it difficult to image a college kid who would run from such an experience.

              But this is why the answer to “are we having a libertarian moment?” is always “no”. The slice of people who respond to having their ideas and beliefs challenged with a joyful introspection is roughly the same as the population of transgendered chartered accountants with asperger’s syndrome. Strangely, this is about the size of the commentariat at HnR.

              1. It’s less a question of finding something that offends me as making me question my reasons for fealing things and determining if they’re logical or not.

                So yes. Offend me. Make me question what I believe. I’ll be a better person for it.

              2. I don’t know if I’d say that anything presented as comedy really offends me.

              3. Yes, the other day I was looking at my own stats, and that coincidence struck me, too.

            2. He is soooo saying “don’t offend me”, what he really means is “go ahead and say things that are offensive to others, cause I like a good laugh, but if you offend me… get the fuck out!”

            3. No, but he is claiming the power to regulate your speech. Whether what you have to say is offensive or not, it is your right to make your own decision on what to say. You have no way to guarantee that he won’t be offended. He is claiming the power to decide what is proper to discuss and what is not, despite his generous offer to allow you to offend him.

        2. What’s the deal with teathuglicans?

          *applause, fervent nodding*

          1. +1 you’ve been waiting all day, so I’ll cut to the quick: You’ve won the internets today! Congratulations!
            We here at the internets have recently changed the prize schedule: Where once there was a specific prize for a specific day, you can now choose your award, no matter what day you win on!
            So, for today’s prize you may choose any of the following two:
            1. Mexican ass sex
            2. Pot
            3. A catered Gay Wedding
            4. A Briggs and Stanton wood chipper

            1. *Briggs and Stratton, of course.

              1. Oh, and in the case that numbers 1 and 3 coincide, you may choose one other prize…

        3. What’s the deal with teathuglicans?

          *applause, fervent nodding*

          1. the squirrels must’ve really liked that joke

            1. lap- Thanks for your dog advice. It was on topic. I’ll send my dog right after that squirrel. Look for its dead body on your doorstep ASAP.

              1. THIS IS NOT A THREAT!111!

                1. You may have already seen this, but VP referenced you:

                  http://www.bloombergview.com/a…..ree-speech

                  1. Saw that.

                    VIRGINIA LIKES ME BEST!11

                    1. I’m still irritated that I didn’t make it onto the list. I gotta be more vile…

                  2. Bloomberg View was better when Postrel was writing there.

                  3. ” (Reason has since removed the offending comments.)”

                    So much for Free Minds.

                    1. Wait, you mean that a magazine that purports to fight for the libertarian valued, should actually to live up to those values?
                      That’s just crazy talk.

                2. Looks like it was run through a w[redacted]!

              2. That is sweet, thanks. Although your dog will probably trek halfway back across the country to put it on your doorstep. I sense a Disney movie in the making.

            1. (who had a cameo on Seinfeld as his fiancee who he had to break up with because they were too alike)

              1. That was back when she bathed frequently. Then someone told her she did not have to, and boy did she run with it.

                Natures perfume, straight up.

                1. Yeah, but would you?

                  1. That’s directed at CJ

            2. OT, but I actually had a business relationship once with a guy who claimed to be related to her, had same name, whoopee, not sure I was convinced.
              They deal was part of that whole “DenverJay vs the SEC” thing.
              Good times, good times.

        4. Thats like the people who distinguish between political speech and other speech for 1st amendment protections.

          All speech is political speech.

          “Buy my beer” is political speech.

          Speaking of which, I cant legally do a “Buy one beer get one free” deal but I can legally do “Buy two beers for the price of one”.

          Also, also, one inspection to go and I’m fully licensed. If everything goes well, batch zero is a go on July 1.

          1. Will this be available local, then? Do I have to go to BG to get some?

          2. Do you have a name yet? We get down that way traveling through the cesspit of Ohio and would love to stop in when you’re open.

      2. As long as you offend the right people, you’re okay.

        1. When you offend the government’s enemies, you’re being courageous, speaking truth to power. When you offend the government you’re just being offensive.

    2. but has something to say.

      “you’re an overgrown child” says something.

    3. Why should anyone be having fun in a world where racism and sexism exist?

  5. To my mind, this sort of formulation is, as Seinfeld’s Kenny Bania might put it, the worst.

    No, that’s Nikki.

    1. Thank you.

      1. I know, right?

        Some people.

    2. I thought it was Britta?

      Too many the worsts in this world.

    3. What if Nikki is Bania? Have you ever seen them in the same place at the same time? Illuminati: confirmed.

    4. +1 good catch. I wish I hadn’t already awarded the internet to somebody else today.
      You know what? Today the internets awards, for the first time ever, two winners on the same day!

      So, for today’s prize you may choose any of the following two:
      1. Mexican ass sex
      2. Pot
      3. A catered Gay Wedding
      4. A Briggs and Stratton wood chipper

  6. You know, I really want to believe that these people are so helpless and out of touch that they’ll be their own undoing. But they’ll be useful idiots to someone who wants to manipulate them for power. And it starts on college, then spreads into the rest of the world as they grow up get older. It’s scary.

    It’s times like these I think we need some sort of more organized push back*.

    *Of an intellectual and cultural kind. Since apparently we need to watch our phrasing now.

    1. So what you’re saying is that every college kid like this should be fed to a woodchipper? Am I reading this accurately?

      1. A metaphorical woodchipper.

        1. I would run them through a figurative woodchipper first.

      2. That’s what I’m getting out of it.

        How much college student could a woodchipper chip?

        If a woodchipper could chip college students, of course.

        Theoretically. Not in any SERIOUS way. Just imagining. Not fer reelz. Kidding. A joke. That doesn’t offend anyone.

        OK, I’m just leaving….

        *looks around furtively*

        1. Carefuly. *Looking* furtive is just acting suspiciously, and might get you stopped and questioned. *Moving* furtively is grounds for summary execution.

          1. I’d have cut them into 1″ wide strips to even fit them into my w[redacted], can you imagine the amount of work that would take?

      3. Mulch is very useful.

      4. No, the woodchipper would be seriously damaged by his granite cranium.

        -jcr

      5. It was my understanding that he thinks they should all be reserved one of the hottest seats in hell.

      6. We should poke their eyes and ears out and remove their vocal cords; then they won’t ever have to pose as covering these bodily devices, anymore(ala the “three mystic apes”)!

    2. It’s just a new way to express the same idiocy. They’ve always been more numerous in the population, that’s why the founders set up the system they set up. Giving anyone who can fog a mirror the right to vote has worked out as well as giving loans to anyone who can fog a mirror.

  7. But if you’re going to come to my college and perform in front of me, be prepared to write up a set that doesn’t just offend me, but has something to say.

    Great, Jerry can show up and do a routine about how a large portion of college students are just sniveling little shits who spend more time thinking about superficial diversity than considering the benefits of intellectual diversity. They go to college for 4 years and, by the end, half of them are too fucking stupid to figure out what they were there for. There’s some social commentary.

    1. No, you don’t understand. You’re only allowed to speak truth to power if you avoid criticizing institutions that the left has deemed beyond mockery. This is why criticizing Islam, for example, isn’t speaking truth to power despite the fact that Islam is the major political guiding system of 40 countries and 1.6 billion people. It’s also why attacking trust fund babies who are attending Oberlin in the hope of sliding effortlessly into some cushy non-profit job isn’t speaking truth to the privileged and the powerful. They’re progressives. By definition they’re the cute underdogs.

      1. But Bill Bennet wants to do it too, so that’s, like, equivalent.

        What would Ron Wyden do?

      2. That’s actually kinda funny as the author of the piece is that rare unicorn, a pro-Israel advocate at the University of California who had the audacity to criticize the BDS movement as anti-Semitic.

  8. While I do agree with you that college students today are more sensitive to issues of race and gender politics, it’s simply because that’s our job as learners. As college students who are engaged in a myriad of social, economic, and political issues, it’s our duty to be actively engaged and educated about issues of sexism, racism and prejudice.

    One learns best by screaming down dissenters and running to safe spaces.

    1. You can really only be expected to learn if you’re in a safe place.

  9. We’re all doomed.

  10. But if you’re going to come to my college and perform in front of me, be prepared to write up a set that doesn’t just offend me, but has something to say.

    Of course, this little shit wouldn’t hesitate to offend people who don’t agree with him. You know, “icky people”.

    We all really are fucked, aren’t we?

    1. Libertarian moment!!

    2. It does make me wistful for the comedy of my youth.

      1. I was a Sam Kinison fan myself.

  11. Great alt text, Nick.

    Seth Meyers sucks. He is a smug, impotent, boring comedian who could not get the best of Ted Cruz or Carley Fiorina, which is saying something.

    1. Also, great video link. I have a huge crush on Amy Sedaris. Her books are great gifts for people with fun sense of humor.

    2. Great alt text, Nick.

      Truly, a post worth reading.

  12. I think of “Seinfeld2000” from the Tweeterz every time I hear about JARY. Mike Riggs linked to it somewhere – been hooked ever since.

    I think “Seinfeld2000” narrating the SJW/college griefer articles “would be best, Jary! It best!”

    Read this story – it’s superb.

    http://gawker.com/the-apple-st…..1252902543

  13. “There is nothing more conservative than insisting that entertainment be didactic and serious?that it have “something to say.” ”

    You make good points, but this isn’t really right. It’s not ‘conservative’ to insist entertainment be serious, it’s authoritarian. No one obsessed over the seriousness of art like ostensibly revolutionary regimes such as the Soviet Union and Mao’s China.

    1. Exactly, this is a feature of the progressive totalitarianisms. Art that does not advance the ideology is degenerate and to be suppressed. A significant portion of the American left is there intellectually at this time but they do not control the full apparatus of the state to enforce it, but they are getting closer.

      1. I would actually argue that it is necessary for radical and “progressive” movements to kill artistic diversity, all art that exists for purely aesthetic reasons, and eliminate all art that does not fit their political agenda. This is because, unlike conservatives who really just want to conserve traditional rules and mores, progressive and radical movements need to ACTIVELY REVOLUTIONIZE the way people are thinking. They have to attempt to effectively brainwash the public into accepting an entirely new means of economic or social organization.

        This is why progressive and radical ideologies always become authoritarian. You can’t allow people to partake of art or comedy merely for enjoyment, because most people are innately conservative in the things they like and will therefore resist your attempts to mold them to your needs. It’s only through claiming that art that doesn’t serve the revolution is evil that you can insure the public will be open to being brainwashed in service to your goals.

        1. That’s the dumb, insecure ones. Smart ones are quite OK with “circuses” part of bread and circuses, and it’s OK if art is completely apolitical. Problem is then, how do you ensure it is not political when everything is politicized, but “man get hits in crotch” and variants on bedroom farce are usually OK.
          What I’m saying, Western universities are now, when it comes to art, worse than Eastern and Central Europe in 70s and 80s.

        2. See Soviet or NAZI Art. Way too drunk to serve up a link just google it for Christ’s sake

    2. What, Janet Reno and Frankfurt school not conservative enough for you? I know Marxists are first people I think of when I hear the word!

    3. “It’s not ‘conservative’ to insist entertainment be serious, it’s authoritarian. No one obsessed over the seriousness of art like ostensibly revolutionary regimes such as the Soviet Union and Mao’s China.”

      Indeed, these people really are just modern Puritans. I think Moldbug was onto something.

    4. Maybe not conservative. But I think “reactionary” is accurate. And conservative in the popular sense of old, stuffy and no fun.

  14. Snowflake sez:

    Provocative humor, such as ones dealing with topics of race and gender politics, can be crass and vulgar, but underlying it must be a context that spurs social dialogue about these respective issues.

    FUCK YOU. It’s not a comedian’s job to “spur social dialog”, you useless little twat. The comedian’s job is to be FUNNY.

    -jcr

  15. I really need to watch Strangers with Candy again, because right now the only reference that pops to mind (other than the retardation tape, thanks to you all) is the driver instructor pulling out a dodgeball and nailing a student in the face in the middle of a driving simulation. And that’s from the movie.

    Anyway, this is all a valuable reminder that some college students are The Worst. You’re not intellectual giants or the vanguard of civilization. You’re stupid fucking kids who are still learning. Sure, you can have something useful to say or do, but you’re not the chosen eggheads of humanity, responsible for all that is good and decent in the world. And you’re definitely not the ones protecting “minorities,” many of whom you’ll never interact with or truly try to understand.

    1. For instance, I think someone posted a HuffPo piece by a college freshman yesterday about why we need to take Bernie Sanders seriously.

      A freshman!

      1. To be fair, as a freshman I also wrote about why we need to take people like (Bernie Sanders) seriously.

        Granted, it was in the context of “these people are serious believers in their own deluded ideas”, but hey.

    2. The best kind of ignorance is arrogant ignorance, the kind you broadcast to the whole world. The first step to true wisdom is, of course, knowing that you know everything.

    3. What college students have uniquely is no ties: no mortgage, probably no car payments, no investments to monitor. There are free and loose, and can take summer off (with parents financial help!) to tour Europe or Thailand.

      They also have little to lose from protests, such as being jailed for a night or two, and they have no employer who will can them for getting caught up in rabble rousing.

      That is ALL that students provide for society. They have no wisdom on tap, no experience, nothing that actually advances society. They only have the ability to shake up society, and then only by flailing and floundering and making noise and disturbing the status quo.

      1. You forgot “provide strip clubs with a steady flow of applicants”.

  16. So, Nick’s position is that it’s okay to offend and be aggressively irreverent in pursuit of humor even political humor. And, there should be a places that thrives on disagreement and differing concepts of that which is acceptable.

    “..college and academia more broadly should be places that thrive on disagreements and different conceptions of what is good, true, and acceptable.”

    *Wink, wink* We get you, Nick. And, thanks.

    1. Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

      1. It says a lot about society that most internet communities are over regulated/moderated cesspools of group think. The internet lets people organize themselves, and most decide to impose a series of ridiculous and arbitrarily enforced rules.

        1. That’s where governments come from. Humans (in general) are minor to major control-freaks.

    2. icwutudidthar

      1. Dammit third time in one thread the internets has been awarded today.

  17. The leftists/Marxists have always had an elitist strain that was opposed to pop culture for its lack of meaning. The PC movement really isn’t much different than Marxist intellectuals throughout the 20th century bemoaning the loss of culture to the trivial mass media. Soviet art was supposed to be utilitarian and have ‘meaning’ as in help indoctrinate people on revolutionary ideology. And its all tied to where that phrase PC comes from.

    Conservative movements often had issues with art and morality, but this particular strain of group think comes from the left. Everything is political in the leftist world view. That isn’t new, either. Far more of the progressive movement can be traced back to Marx than most/many historians and intellectuals are willing to admit.

    Most of the comedians the Huffington Post pajama boy would have issues with are in, in fact, of color. One reason comedians of color can’t get mainstream TV gigs is because many of them are not PC at all.

    1. All of that. They are totalitarian. The means everything in society is subsumed into the state and thus is political. So everything must support and further the proper politics. Anything that doesn’t must either be co-opted and made to do so or be destroyed.

      One of the great subversives pieces of art done under communism was a painting done by a Cuban artist that was nothing but a portrait of a beautiful young woman with the word “Love” written above it. The powers that be and their toadies went ballistic over it. The reason was because all art was supposed to further the right politics and that painting, as harmless as it was, didn’t do that and was thus wildly subversive.

    2. “Marxist intellectual” is an oxymoron.

      -jcr

      1. Unfortunately, that isn’t true. Many intellectuals are and always have been completely wrong about everything. Being smart and being wrong can and often do go together.

  18. I noticed that the commenters on HuffPost were pretty harsh on him. He didn’t quite get mulched, but he now sports a second anus.

  19. That Amy Schumer skit the “open letter” writer references was making of WHITE PEOPLE, not rape. White, country, Southern dumb fuck hillbilly football playing rapists! Which is entirely within the acceptable boundaries of the PC crowd.

    But this non-self aware tool doesn’t get even come close to getting that; claiming it is making fun of “rape”. And then to prove his point about “rape culture existent in high school football”, he links to s a story that involves African American youths. So I ask…. where is the Amy Schumer skit about being raped by African American youths? Now THAT would a barrel of freaking laughs, I am sure, and a real hit on the college campus!

  20. There is nothing more conservative than insisting that entertainment be didactic and serious?that it have “something to say.”

    Paging Postrel. Paging Postrel.

  21. Sounds like a rock solid plan to me dude.
    http://www.Total-Anon.tk

    1. You know who else thought his plan was rock solid?

      1. The architect of the pyramids?

      2. The Rolling Stones tour manager?

  22. Offend the fuck out of college students. Provoke the fuck out of me. We’ll thank you for it later.

    Ohhh, edgy.

    1. “…thank you for it later.’

      But roast your ass and ship you off to Siberia today. Later, though… later, we’ll thank you.

    2. Yeah the other side to the “offensive comedy” coin is that a lot of hacks just try to throw around “fuck” as much as possible until they hit critical mass and people start thinking it’s new because they forgot 8th grade.

      1. I think we are long past that point. A lot of people just say “fuck” a lot.

  23. I’m a huge fan of Seinfeld (seen every episode of the show probably well over a dozen times; paid over $100 to see him live twice), but it’s beyond comical (ha!) that he, of all people, would be the one making this point and getting roasted for it. Both times I saw him live, I went with my middle aged father. Seinfeld is hilarious, but he’s about as edgy as Little House on the Prairie. To the extent the show ever even bordered on risque it was mostly Larry David’s creative influence. If you’ve got to the point where Jerry fucking Seinfeld is too controversial for you, it’s time to hang it up.

    1. I don’t know, I recall seeing him live when I was younger, and was surprised that his act at that point was cruder than his post-Seinfeld HBO special. He did some bits about sex and even cussed a few times!

      He’s not CK or Chris Rock or anything, but he’s also not some vanilla joke-maker. More important, perhaps, is that he does associate closely with such comics and likes that humor. Apparently his laugh at Funkhouser’s cunt joke was genuine.

      1. I saw him circa 2005, and at that point his act was pretty tame, comparatively. There might have been a couple of jokes that they couldn’t have put on NBC. Even at his most vulgar, I doubt he could hold a candle to some of the raunchier comics out there. Even mainstream old white guys like Ron White and Lewis Black seem downright dirty by comparison. It’s just ironic seeing this point made by a guy with such mass appeal, a clean, mainstream image, and relatively tame standard set.

        1. Gosh I love Lewis Black despite his being a commie pinko. He does a great job of taking down both Republicrats and Democans.

          1. Yeah. I remember running across one of his cable specials on TV, and I had heard good things, so I decided to watch. I spent like the first half hour laughing myself to exhaustion. Then he did a bit on healthcare…

            1. A Lewis Black routine that has always made me laugh is the candy corn one.

              Note: there is some salty language in there.

          2. Yeah, he does well at not being too annoyingly ideological. I do prefer it when I can hear a comedian and have no idea what their politics are at the end, though.

  24. Uh, oh. Gillespie’s working Robby’s side of the street.
    Stand by for FIREWORKS.

    1. Last time this happened, Robby posted the same story about an hour after Nick’s and bumped it off the HR link list.

    2. Ouch! That’s worse than two women showing up to a party in the same dress.

  25. Progressives are also obsessed with using the cliche line that we need to sit down and have a collective “talk” about an issue. Of course, said talks really mean you need to sit there and be lectured at by your intellectually superiors and accept whatever they suggest, but having a ‘talk’ sounds better to them.

    It’s probably not PC for me to point out that they basically use the terminology of nagging housewives to build their weepy arguments.

    1. “Talk” to them means lets have a self criticism session where you explain all of the ways you are wrong and I tell you what you have missed.

  26. It should be said in defense of college students in general that these pricks are a small but vocal and nasty minority. Most college students are too busy studying, working and or having a good time and doing what young people do to act like this. Instead of condemning college students in general, we should be encouraging the great silent majority of them who are not like this to stand up to the minority who are.

    1. They won’t. For them, they may as well be living in North Korea while on campus. Any least step out of line or questioning of the collective group think will have severe consequences. All these students want is to survive in that environment long enough to graduate. And survival means keeping quiet when you can and agreeing when you have to.

      1. I don’t know what your college experience was like, but where I went to college if people thought you were being stupid, they said so. In class and out. PC was always under fire.

        1. My college experience was over 25 years ago. It was a different world back then.

        2. If the political culture at my school could be described as anything it would be apathetic, and I doubt it’s changed much since I was there.

          1. Same here, and it still is like that. On the other hand it’s 80% math and engineering students.

    2. This. But university admins are on the side of the butthurt, vocal minority and so this continues. This mentality is really only prevalent in certain disciplines, and amplified at certain schools. State flagship engineering program? No. Trendy, private, liberal arts school sociology majors? Hell yes and they are the ones that become university admins.

      1. I should note that university admins are some of the least useful people I’ve ever dealt with.

      2. The squeaky wheel gets the oil.

        1. 100+ years of progressive strategy has proved that theory absolutely correct.

          Being the squeaky wheel while others cared for their families and worked harder at their jobs, has got them complete control of the media, academia, and almost every other single facet of society.

    3. Standing up to them is mostly a waste of time when you could be busy studying, working, or having a good time.

    4. “Campus editors-at-large” seem to always be in that vocal minority, for some reason.

  27. Yes, Mr. Seinfeld, we college students are politically correct. We will call out sexism and racism if we hear it. But if you’re going to come to my college and perform in front of me, be prepared to write up a set that doesn’t just offend me, but has something to say.

    How’s that fucking off back to your cave of humorlessness going, you addled twat?

    “I must seek out all that offends my stunted sensibilities!”

  28. So, anyway.
    A judge walks into a wood chipper….

    1. Bur no one suggested the judge do so.

  29. San Diego State student Anthony Berteaux

    [sends e-mail to HR, adding Mr. Berteaux to the “Do not hire, ever. Do not interview, ever. Do not respond to, ever.” list.]

    1. Why not respond? Send an email with a link to this letter and say “this is why we will not be hiring you.”

      1. Asking for lawsuits there.

  30. This fucking dipshit doesn’t even get two sentences in before misusing the word “reverence.” And it just goes downhill from there. But of course, I can’t criticize because Nick will shut down the comments as soon as this kid sends Reason an email threatening to sue for privilege or something.

  31. uncomfortable feeling he now gets from his audience when he tells his joke about people who scroll through their phone like a “gay French king.”

    […]

    ‘Well, that’s offensive to suggest that a gay person moves their hands in a flourishing motion and you now need to apologize.’

    Oh, for a second I thought they were insulted that he was insunuating they were French.

  32. Oh, why do I scroll down to the comments?

    Paul Williams
    Political correctness has no business being in society. It is a mere cancer and must be destroyed at all costs. Thank you progressives for regressing our society!
    Reply ? Like ? 141 ? Follow Post ? 14 hours ago

    Carl E. Sherwin ? Top Commenter
    moron
    Reply ? Like ? 13 ? 13 hours ago

    Howard Bordon ? Top Commenter ? Bouncer at Planet Venus
    Paul you are a racist and likely burn crosses in neighbors yards,,,, all logic points to me being correct
    Reply ? Like ? 2 ? 13 hours ago

    “All logic” seems to have no meaning to this person.

    1. Does the last comment come up to the level of a “true threat”?

    2. The Internet has ruined words like “logic” and “science.” “Fallacy” is one that I see misused all the damn time.

  33. To be sure, San Diego State student Anthony Berteaux also insists in his letter that, hey, he likes edgy and funny folks such as Amy Schumer and Louis C.K. and George Carlin and that Seinfeld should

    Who is this Amy Schumer I keep hearing about, and is she actually funny?

    1. She’s ok. Not great.

      1. Agreed. She’s good for about one episode of female-angle taboo/toilet humor. Then once you’ve run through the “sex with minors”, “abortion”, “women pooing”, “mistaken/displaced seduction”… list; not funny.

    2. She’s about a thousand times as funny as Sarah Silverman, which makes her almost half as funny as Richard Belzer on an off day.

      -jcr

      1. Trigger Warning: Sexism

        There has never been a truly great female stand up comic.

        1. I don’t suppose Eddie Izzard counts

          1. He’s a heterosexual male who just dresses in women’s clothes. An “executive transvestite” as he calls himself.

        2. I think women can be as funny as men, but female stand up comics almost always seem to focus more on being crass and obnoxious for effect than being funny.

          1. To be fair, there’s very, very few truly great male stand up comics either. I think you’re right though. The female comics feel like they have to one-up their male peers and the craft suffers for it.

        3. I dunno, Jane Lynch was pretty damn funny as a stand-up.

          1. I didn’t even know she did stand-up. I do think she’s funny though.

            1. I don’t know if she does any more, but I saw her about the time Role Models came out, and she was hilarious. Much better than the guy who plays Champ in Anchorman. He sucked.

        4. I think Lisa Lamponelli, in small doses, is funny as hell.

        5. My grandfather told me that Sophie Tucker was hilarious.

          -jcr

  34. So when will Anthony Berteaux be receiving his courage award from SDSU?

  35. he likes edgy and funny folks such as Amy Schumer and Louis C.K. and George Carlin and that Seinfeld should

    Not Margaret Cho? What a racist misogynist.

  36. “Let’s also point out that the actual problem with campus political correctness?which seeks not simply to enforce ideological or political orthodoxy but to shut down debate and discussion via overt acts of censorship and sustained campaigns to delegitimate as racist, sexist, classist, whatever free expression and inquiry?attaches to students and faculty that are hounded into administrative hearings and/or silence— is that it is just a made-up “snarl word” that isn’t real, and is over-used by old people, bigots and xenophobes, reveals you to be a jackass for daring to suggest that taboos against potentially offending victim groups are inappropriate, which is ridiculous, reactionary and retrograde.

    FTFY

    because there’s absolutely nothing Orwellian about accusing people of Speech Crime

    1. I’ve always been partial to this definition:

      A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

      1. this definition requires people to be able to think beyond the process of “identifying out-group members and screeching at them like a squirrel who’s spotted a red-tailed hawk”

        they will not enact that labor for you

    2. They have a real flair for alliteration.

      1. You give “them” too much credit. that was *me*

        1. Why’d you put it in quotes, then?

  37. Btw, this bit was pretty much tailor-made for this kid.

  38. All of this talk about Jerry Seinfeld and I haven’t seen one mention of Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee, http://comediansincarsgettingcoffee.com/ The quality of the comedians vary (i.e. Sarah Silverman? No thanks), but some of them are quite good. My favorite episodes that I’ve seen: Louis CK, Joel Hodgson, Larry David, and Michael Richards

    1. I’ve only ever seen the Michael Richards episode, which was nice (and kinda sad).

  39. One upon a time, a Social Justice Warrior came across one of those career-advisor tests that recommends a career based on your interests. He filled out the questions, making sure he filled out every one of them, and then sat back awaiting the answer. In a few seconds, his uncharacteristic patience was rewarded with the test’s cheery reply:

    “BASED UPON YOUR INTERESTS, the ideal career for you is:

    “—GOVERNMENT CENSOR—“

  40. “snarl word”

    That reminds me of a site a friend directed me to. Something or other about a druid. Lots and lots of pawing the ground, not much actual substance. One of those really thoughtful liberals who moderates the shit out of comments, fastidiously weeding out anything more critical than, “You are, like, the TOTALLY most awesome reasonable thoughtful commenter on the entire interweb!”

    1. i wish i had tagged it and saved it for memory, but there was a really enlightening subthread in a Gawker post about how much people really loved the power to be able to send comments they disliked into the “Grey Zone of disapproval” where no one would ever have to confront them.

      It wasn’t about the substance of the typically-offending comments, but the near-sexual charge that Gawkerites got from being able to throw other people’s words into the bottomless pit, giving concrete power to their collective displeasure like an internet version of Jabba the Hutt

  41. It’s also worth mentioning that this progressive hero only cited white comics. No black comedians, or Hispanic or Asian. Key and Peele have no problem trafficking in racial and gender stereotypes that are funny but provide no message.

    Does this skit have any social message, or is it simply about how cray-cray some women out there are?

  42. I suppose Jerry Seinfeld is established enough that it seems pretty silly for a college kid to be lecturing at him about what comedy is. I wish comedy didn’t come into this conversation. I agree with what the kid says: apparent racism and sexism can be a part of comedy and won’t offend if it is actually mocking those attitudes. But we shouldn’t be providing a checklist to comics. If they are only offensive, they won’t get laughs, and thus won’t succeed as comics.

    So yes liberal college students can be hypersensitive. That is a bad thing. Meanwhile what are you ignorant fucks contributing to the world?

    1. “Jerry Seinfeld is established enough that it seems pretty silly for a college kid to be lecturing at him about what comedy is.”

      LIBERAL SAYS = SUPPORT THE ESTABLISHMENT

    2. Meanwhile what are you ignorant fucks contributing to the world?

      Physician, heal thyself.

    3. But we shouldn’t be providing a checklist to comics. If they are only offensive, they won’t get laughs, and thus won’t succeed as comics.

      Holy shit, Tony has stumbled into a free market solution.

    4. I produce something that there is a demand for. I get paid in money (a medium of exchange) for it. There is no governmental aggressive force being used, or at least as little as the government will allow.

      Also, I preach to everyone who will listen that you shouldn’t aggress against someone just because they do something you don’t like. I tell the to only use violence if that person aggresses against themselves or another person they are willing to protect.

      Now, what the heck do YOU do?

    5. Who are you calling ignorant, rent-boy?

      -jcr

  43. “I WAS JOKING! DON’T YOU PEOPLE KNOW A JOKE WHEN YOU HEAR ONE?!”

  44. There is nothing more conservative than insisting that entertainment be didactic and serious?that it have “something to say.”

    Homer Simpson called it preachy

  45. Meanwhile what are you ignorant fucks contributing to the world?

    Puerile, poorly typed juvenile hyperbole and allusions to anarchic vigilante mayhem.
    Thanks for asking.

  46. Also, pop culture movie references.

  47. So last night I visit a millenial friend, who lives in his parents’ $2mil brownstone. We’re waiting for his mother to come home so he can borrow her Mercedes so we can ride to the pool hall. As a side note, his parents are somehow 74 and 67.

    Now in the car, and yadda yadda yadda, we’re talking politics, so I bring up libertarianism. He says he doesn’t know much about it, but that capitalism is real bad for a lot of people and that socialism is the way to go as it has a fair distribution of wealth.

    I didn’t really want to get into it, so I just left it at, “Well, you have to decide for yourself; do you have ownership over yourself and your possessions, or does the collective? Because to me, there’s nothing more evil than other people feeling entitled to your stuff, and then having the power to take it. And keep in mind, what with all the people around who are the victims of capitalism, who should inherit the house you live in and the care w’re driving in?”

    That was the end of that line of conversation, but I wonder if I made a dent.

    1. I think you made about as good an effort as you could make. You certainly short circuited his lazy thinking about things. I doubt you made much of a dent, however. You confronted him with a very hard truth that pointed out the inherent contradiction of his objection to capitalism and claimed belief in personal freedom and autonomy. My guess is that he is too intellectually and morally weak to really confront that and likely put it out of his mind and wondered why his parents have such kookie friends.

    2. “Well, you have to decide for yourself; do you have ownership over yourself and your possessions, or does the collective?”

      Part of the problem sounds like he doesn’t have a sense of ownership due to the fact that he relies on his wealthy parents.

      Progressivism seems disproportionately represented among people who are used to having lots of money but don’t know how it got there.

      1. Part of the problem sounds like he doesn’t have a sense of ownership due to the fact that he relies on his wealthy parents.

        I think this can’t be said enough. He’s utterly disconnected from the effort and talent(s) it took to acquire and generate this wealth, so it’s like ‘object permanence’ to him. It’s just sort of… there *poof*

    3. So should people feel entitled to their parents stuff and then use the power of the state to make sure they get their grubby hands on it, or not?

      1. Just because no one likes a spoiled rich kid doesn’t mean there’s some kind of justice in the gov’t taking their parents’ money instead. The most laughable part of that logic is that the assumption that it would be going to LESS privileged people. Because everyone knows how all politicians are starving handicapped orphans.

        1. A prog friend of mine posted some story running around Facebook about how the “Vindictive Kansas Legislature” is cutting welfare. It would never occur to my friend or anyone like her that it might be vindictive for a government to tax people more and take money they lawfully earned away from them. Nope. That is just good government. What is “vindictive” is in anyway refusing to give someone other people’s money when they demand it.

          The whole thing is just twisted.

          1. Government coercion is basically the pinnacle of human warmth and compassion. Don’t you see?

          2. Kansas is in the process of proving you guys wrong about everything, so by all means keep bringing it up.

        2. The only reason the kids are entitled to any of it is because government is there to secure their claim. Wills, contracts, and inheritance laws are all backed up by government apparatus, obviously. Otherwise, except by tradition, the kids are just people off the street looking to take something they didn’t earn.

          I’m not saying libertarian ethics are inconsistent, I’m saying they consistently favor keeping wealth in the hands of wealthy families, even if they aren’t consistent any other way.

          1. Yes, families are propped up artificially by the government, and that is why you are the king of trolls.

          2. If you put your brain in a bird, the bird would fly backwards.

          3. You forgot guns. If someone takes my parents’ stuff from me, I will kill them with guns. This is called “property rights”.

            BTW, none of us are anything like “wealthy”, class warrior.

          4. Yeah, you tell ’em, Tony! Wealthy is BAAAD.

            We will all be One with the Borg

      2. People should feel entitled to leave their stuff to their children if they so choose, Tony. But I’m glad you’ve discovered the false choice fallacy, at least your repertoire is expanding.

        1. Just as long as we’re not defending this system based on a concept of “earning.” Think about it. You could have a guy get wealthy by sheer plunder, and then 10 generations come and go and you’d be defending the right of his descendants to all the wealth from that plunder and any wealth it generated along the way. No earning ever came into the picture. So what’s your beef with welfare recipients, exactly?

          1. But I am defending it on the concept of earning. I’m defending the right of the guy who earned it to dispose of his wealth as he sees fit. And if he sees fit to leave it to his useless offspring, that’s entirely his business and none of yours.

            1. Nobody earned a dime in my hypothetical.

              It’s just that libertarianism is OK with lazy parasitism as long as it’s the right people.

              1. I’m perfectly ok with lazy parasitism as long as both the host and the parasite are consenting parties. I’m a lot less ok with parasites holding a gun to the head of their host.

              2. You say no one earned it because you call it “plunder”. Who decides that? You? and then you just take it. Why does it bother you people so much that someone makes some money? It just pure envy because of your lack of it.

                1. I’ll give a specific example: someone got rich by selling cotton picked by people who got no paychecks and were bought and sold as property, after stealing the land from its inhabitants, of course. Did he earn the loot he got? None of his descendants did, obviously. So why even talk about “earning” at all? It’s all about protecting wealth where it happens to be right now. Taxation and redistribution, something every civilization does, is the height of fairness compared to your system, so it’s odd to bitch about it as violating an ethic.

              3. You sound resentful. Tough titty

          2. And we’re back to non sequiturs. I don’t have a beef with welfare recipients; my beef is with the people who steal the money in the first place, not the people they ultimately give a small part of it to. If something inherited was stolen, then it belongs to the descendants of those from whom it was stolen. But that is a specific accusation in a specific case and cannot be used to invalidate inheritance in general, no matter how unfair you feel it may be.

          3. The only sheer plunderer is the fucking government and all the blood sucking ticks living off its favors.

            Fuck that shit.

          4. Darwin.

            Welfare dumbs down the species and throws a monkey wrench into human evolution.

      3. That’s dumb even for you – Insinuating that the kid needs the state to ensure he inherits his parents’ stuff.

      4. So should people feel entitled to their parents stuff

        If their parents give if to them voluntarily, yes. People are entitled to anything they produce or can obtain from others without violence or the threat of violence.

        -jcr

  48. what with all the people around who are the victims of capitalism, who should inherit the house you live in and the care w’re driving in?”

    This reminds me of the scene in Dr Zhivago, where the house has been taken over by revolutionary proletarians squatters.

    1. …that way [was] better…more just…

  49. So should people feel entitled to their parents stuff and then use the power of the state to make sure they get their grubby hands on it, or not?

    That depends. Did the parent freely will/give the stuff to the child, or did they legally leave it to the Flat Earth Society? In the case of children contesting a will, I am less sympathetic.

    1. Government to protect the right of parents to give their wealth to their kids (or whomever). No government to protect the right of poor children not to starve to death. Because not starving isn’t a right while randomly getting a windfall you didn’t earn is. Because poor people are icky and don’t have rights until they decide to get off their lazy asses and find rich parents.

      1. There it is, envy in full prog view.

        Mehhmmmmmm (gov’t), it’s not FAIR that Billy has more than me! Now go get your guns and gimme gimme gimme some of that sweet sweet free cake!

        1. It’s not about fairness, it’s about you supporting a form of government whose sole purpose is to protect the assets of the wealthy from the grubby hands of the poor, but not address any other interest human beings have. Fairness is beside the point. We have to get to basic sense first.

          1. If it’s not about “fairness”, then why the hell do it?

            1. Because I don’t feel like paying for a government that only protects the interests of the wealthy.

              1. I know. You’re such a sweetheart.

                You do know that there are a veritable plethora of private charities dedicated to feeding the poor, don’t you?

                Hell, you can even volunteer there. Cook turkey, stuffing, pumpkin pie.

                No one will put you in a wood chipper at the 2nd Harvest Food Bank, Tony.

                So, go forth and turkey

              2. If so, I would expect you to be more libertarian. You wouldn’t be taxed for those programs you find objectionable (like South Korean defense, for instance). You could direct all your funds to those causes you hold most dear.

                Right?

              3. That’s what you’ve got now, sparky.

                -jcr

      2. I LOVE YOU TONY!!!!

      3. Property is a right. Life is a right. “Not starving” is not a right. Rich, poor, child, adult has nothing to do with it.

        1. HOW DARE YOU DISAGREE WITH TONY WHOM I LOVE BECAUSE HE IS MY BEST FRIEND AND THE SMARTESTS OF REASONCOMMENTERS!!!

          Just because he does not appear to understand that the transmission of wealth from parents to their children is a right of the parents, who can do as they please with their property, and not of the children or that the children don’t have a right to jackshit, doesn’t mean that he’s wrong!!! What about teh feelz?????

        2. I say not starving is a right. But then all I have to rely on is centuries of development of civilization and political philosophy, whereas you guys apparently possess God’s own little book of acceptable rights.

          1. Of course you would. But you never miss a meal, even with a starving urchin pleading in front of you, do you?

            1. I usually skip lunch.

              1. You do know that government welfare programs (food stamps) are more about crony capitalism than feeding starving kids, don’t you?

                Gee, just where would Coke a Cola be if its customer base wasn’t subsidized? It may actually lose market share!

          2. TONY I WILL FIND YOU A COPY OF THAT BOOK TOO BECAUYSE I LUV YOU AND WANT YOU TO BE HAPPY!!!!!

            HAPPYNESS IS A RIGHT!!!!!

          3. “But then all I have to rely on is centuries of development of civilization and political philosophy, whereas you guys apparently possess God’s own little book of acceptable rights.”

            What I wouldn’t give to be able to physically lift the irony and bludgeon you with it.

      4. Isn’t that what wood chippers are for?

        Elimination of poor starving urchins?

        1. Do we have a right to woodchippers? Do starving orphans have a right to woodchippers? How can anyone really know?

          1. Sorry, I am not a lawyer and I don’t even play one on tv.

            But, I heard they’re scaring the shit out of the government.

          2. Sorry, I am not a lawyer and I don’t even play one on tv.

            But, I heard they’re scaring the shit out of the government.

      5. If you had your own children, you’d think differently.

      6. Maybe you’re correct. But it is irrelevant.

        Because it’s not about what you do with your own assets, is it? You’re probably a kind and generous sweatheart.

        It’s that you want everyone else to do as you do. To see the world as you see it – we must feed those poor urchins!

        So, it’s not about you, or about the urchins. It’s about the rest of us. The rest of us – the selfish and the uncaring.

        True?

        1. In 100% exactly the same way you want me to open my wallet to pay for police, courts, and prisons to rectify any trespassing you might become victim to. Pay for your own damn security guards. Can you afford it, do you think?

  50. As someone who read this article on a phone and had to swipe my phone like a gay french king to scroll down, I am deeply offended. A trigger warning would have been nice

  51. The problem is not political correctness, it’s that Seinfeld is boring and unfunny. No wonder students are pissed having wasted their time listenting to his drivel.

    1. Except, well Kramer’s refusal to wear the Aids walk ribbon

  52. No government to protect the right of poor children not to starve to death.

    That- that brought a tear to my eye.
    I haz a chastizemint.

    1. Remember how, before FDR, the streets were filled with starving children scrounging for stray puppies while evil robber barons bathed in their blood?

      1. Ah, good times, indeed. My great grandfather, Cornelius van Derpenstein, used to use starved children as fuel at his pollution factory.

    2. Stop insulting Tony!!!! He is the smartest commenter on Reason smarter than everyone else put together times infinity squared!!!! You are just jealouse of his awesome and you hate starving childrenz!!!

      TONY I GOT YOURE BACK BUDDY!!!!!

      1. No way. Sugar Free is fucking awesome.

        I love you Sug!

  53. So… does this mean we’re gonna be seeing Steve Sailer articles in Reason now? Or would that be a little too un-PC?

  54. Don’t forget Tipper Gore and her warning labels.

  55. Kinda (but maybe not) OT:

    In light of recent developments, Reason should use disqus or something like that for their comment section. Aside from protecting commenters from the DOJ, we should he able to downvote spams, create avatars, edit spelling mistakes, etc.

    It’s not bowing to PC for a private company to set TOS and have mods delete offensive posts. “This government official should be shot to death” should be deleted. Language filters would help. Of course, if they choose to leave the comment section completely unregulated, the government shouldn’t go after commenters for posting internet bluster.

    1. Yeah, let’s just capitulate to the fucking DOJ, a Federal judge and their fear of wood chippers. Be as safe and as collaborative as anyone else using Disgus.

      I think not.

  56. Je suis Agammamon

  57. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…
    http://www.worktoday7.com

  58. It’s OK. College is the appropriate place to experiment with saying stupid things.

  59. “Gay French king” doesn’t even make any damn sense.
    And Seinfeld’s the most overrated show ever.

  60. This snot nosed little faggot can go fuck himself, fucking pretentious little girl. I find his very existence offensive, so who’s going to defend my hurt feelings then?

  61. They claim to celebrate diversity but only if central committee agrees with you -OK comrades?

  62. Someone needs to tell the college student douche bags to quit acting like a bunch of pussies.

  63. And yet Jon Stewart is given awards for being a Jew hating bigot. Yes I said it. Ever since he legally changed his name, married a shiksa and had two WASP children I no longer call him a stereotypic self hater. He’s an offensive antisemite who’d be right at home with Hamas or David Duke. The PC crowd can’t love and worship him hard enough. So clearly being inoffensive means being offensive about the people the PC crowd hates.

  64. Thanks Nick, read that column earlier, was so depressed I couldn’t articulate a response. Appreciate you putting into words what I was unable to.

  65. At some level, students go to University to lay themselves prostrate to the higher mind.
    It is then expected, at some point, they will begin to think for themselves.
    Upon graduation, it is the goal that they harbor the sum knowledge of their betters, combined with their own well-honed vision of their world.
    What I see today coming out of University is a parroting of lowest common denominator thinking, overemphasis of the self and a rejection of any ideas that go against the mob rule of the day.
    The best comedians are but mirrors of the world.
    If you don’t like what you are seeing, you had better check your premisses.

  66. I can’t wait until these self-righteous, smug, pretentious little fuckfaces get out of college and receive a glorious plowing from reality.

  67. Funny, the knuckleheaded student who said humor must have meaning probably watched every Seinfeld episode while getting older…can’t say growing up, cause it didn’t happen. The funniest part is Seinfeld was a show about absolutely NOTHING and made him a bazillionaire – ?

  68. My son is in college in WA State.

    I can’t speak for all colleges students, but I can say he’s become an idiot since he’s been in school.
    He wants everything for free, thinks big government is great as long as he’s getting something, and in general will do anything to avoid getting a real job.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.