REFLECTIONS AND THOUGHTS

In the comedy circuit, the "funny is funny" philosophy can at times represent a reflection of capitalist ideology, emphasising universal market appeal and prioritising audience satisfaction over critical or subversive content. Comedians adhering to this philosophy may unconsciously uphold system justification, which favours preserving the status quo. From this perspective, humour is treated as a commodity: its value is measured by its ability to generate laughs, sell tickets, and attract viewers, aligning with capitalist principles of profitability and mass appeal.

When anti-capitalist comedians enter this space, they challenge not only societal norms but also the commodification of comedy itself. These comedians often use their platform to critique systemic inequities, question power dynamics, and subvert mainstream expectations of humour. However, their approach can provoke hostility within the comedy circuit, particularly among those who have internalised capitalist values and view dissent as a threat to their industry or personal success.

This hostility can be understood through the lens of system justification theory, where comedians who align with the "funny is funny" ethos perceive anti-capitalist humour as disruptive or even unfunny, not because it lacks comedic merit, but because it challenges their deeply held belief that the current comedic system (and by extension, the capitalist system) is fair and legitimate. The pressure to conform to market demands further reinforces this dynamic, as comedy clubs, streaming platforms, and sponsors often favour material that aligns with broader audience expectations, sidelining or marginalising anti-capitalist voices.

Additionally, false consciousness plays a role in this dynamic. Many comedians may adopt the "funny is funny" mantra not out of genuine philosophical alignment, but because it aligns with the incentives and rewards of a capitalist entertainment industry. They may reject anti-capitalist comedians as a way to distance themselves from perceived risks, fearing that association with subversive material could alienate audiences or jeopardise their careers.

Finally, cultural hegemony ensures that capitalist values dominate the comedy landscape, shaping what is considered funny, acceptable, and marketable. Anti-capitalist comedians threaten this hegemony by introducing perspectives that make audiences uncomfortable or force them to confront systemic injustices. This discomfort often leads to backlash, as both audiences and fellow comedians may resist perspectives that challenge the cultural norms they've been conditioned to accept.

To conclude, the people who sometimes say, "funny is funny" in the comedy circuit can act to mirror capitalist values of market-driven validation and universal appeal, often marginalising anti-capitalist comedians who challenge these norms. This resistance is not merely about comedic taste but reflects deeper psychological and cultural mechanisms designed to defend the status quo and suppress dissent.

To put it another way, the "funny is funny" crowd are not comparable to the likes of Bill Hicks, George Carlin, Sarah Silverman, Maria Bamford, Kate Willett, Hannah Gadsby, and so on, in this world. And that's okay, but nosce te ipsum.