I think if for the joke to work you are supposedto laugh at the ridiculousness of racism, then you're on pretty safe ground.
'Ironic' jokes which otherwise are exactly the same as something Bernard Manning would have told are rather more dodgy.
My moral quandry with this compo is if to make jokes about Nick being wonky eyed and fat, but then to mock him for judging people by the way they look, is hypocritical or not.
('Ironic' jokes which otherwise are exactly the same as something Bernard Manning would have told are rather more dodgy.
My moral quandry with this compo is if to make jokes about Nick being wonky eyed and fat, but then to mock him for judging people by the way they look, is hypocritical or not.
monkeon schmonkeon,
Fri 12 Jun 2009, 11:25,
archived)
good points my joke is up there. No-one's laughing (out loud)
(
Griffin Saver Something, something, 2006, something.,
Fri 12 Jun 2009, 11:26,
archived)
i was under the impression that he wants people of immigrant lineage outnot based on their looks, but based on their "britishness"
( drbroon abloooobloobloo,
Fri 12 Jun 2009, 11:38,
archived)
I'd love to see them develop a test for that Griffin Saver Something, something, 2006, something.,
Fri 12 Jun 2009, 11:41,
archived)
I suspect that it ultimately comes down to looks, though.He has enough links with white supremicist groups to suggest that he judges people on the simple basis whether they are white or not.
The "britishness" thing is surely more a way to get fucking idiots to vote for him.
(The "britishness" thing is surely more a way to get fucking idiots to vote for him.
monkeon schmonkeon,
Fri 12 Jun 2009, 12:11,
archived)
Jokes about people are not very nice or fair, ever. This doesn't make them wrong.Nick Griffin is a man who has made himself unpopular on purpose.
Therefore making jokes about him is less morally problematic than making jokes about, say, injured lambs, or some group with a history of being discriminated against.
Then we have the separate question about whether sick jokes which are deliberately cruel are morally OK, and the question of whether simple cruel jokes are of a good quality or just lowbrow rubbish, both rather complicated questions, but fortunately they don't come into it in this case.
(,
Fri 12 Jun 2009, 11:55,
archived)
Therefore making jokes about him is less morally problematic than making jokes about, say, injured lambs, or some group with a history of being discriminated against.
Then we have the separate question about whether sick jokes which are deliberately cruel are morally OK, and the question of whether simple cruel jokes are of a good quality or just lowbrow rubbish, both rather complicated questions, but fortunately they don't come into it in this case.