The Harm in HaHa
- Natalie Kendel
- Jul 9
- 16 min read
Updated: Jul 11
You probably already know that humour plays a big role as a coping mechanism and even a survival mechanism for people who are suffering. Humour can relieve tension. It can offer a much-needed break from the constant drone of suffering and darkness. But did you know that humour can also be used as an unspoken loophole to escape accountability?
The Laughter of The Oppressed
On the one hand, humour has often been utilised by marginalised people, whether organically or deliberately. It has served as a medicine to emotionally survive and get through the daily struggle, pain, and trauma they are subjected to. Humour can be a way of knitting an oppressed community together. Humour helps to retain story and collective memory. A method of sharing anecdotes functioning as "off loading", the mockery of oppressors with "rubbish-talking", a reminder that the monsters are in fact just vincible humans. Humour even conveys a shared language-code that all with a shared experience can tap into for strength and solidarity, out of sight of the oppressor.
As Matthew Olorunfemi writes on the Black American historical side to this:
"To really understand why Black humour matters, you have to look at what it actually does. Enslaved Africans couldn’t speak out against their owners without risking everything. They weren’t allowed to use their languages, either. So, they found other ways —signals, music, dance, and, of course, jokes. Humour turned into a kind of code. Jokes that seemed harmless or self-mocking to white people actually hid sharp, subversive meanings for Black listeners. It helped people handle pain and loss while, at the same time, letting them express anger, grief, and hope in sly, clever ways."
The humour of the oppressed can be a way to communicate very real, serious things without making the heaviness of it smothering. A way to talk about pain without being overwhelmed by it. In this context, humour can function as an emotional relief valve where pressure and stress that is stored in the body and brain is released without compromising a person's safety and sanity.
But aside from being used a defence mechanism, Mohammed El-Kurd, Palestinian activist and author of "Perfect Victims", argues:
"Why do oppressed people use humour? The idea that it is only used as a “defence mechanism” is reductive, because it obscures the strategic advantage and transformative potential of humour. Laughter is dignifying—it is an act of refusal; it is almost akin to faith in its ability to build an alternative reality where wounds hurt a little less. To be irreverent at the podium is to possess a powerful weapon against dehumanisation, especially when every television interview feels like a cross-examination. And in that performance of irreverence you remind yourself you are part of a collective; a people, many of whom don’t have access to Ivy Leagues or a knack for double-speak. Contrary to popular belief, irreverence can shatter taboos and help others raise their ceiling. It expands the boundaries of what is permissible. And it is often more compelling, more gripping than memorised statistics and persuasive PowerPoint presentations."
This kind of humour is helpful. It's not making light of the grave. Because, after all, oppressed partakers are keenly aware of their reality. What may seem irreverent to white oppressors and colonisers is anything but. Nobody need remind the oppressed of the seriousness of their own suffering. There already exists a shared understanding of the solemnity behind the joke, the bitterness in the sweet. Thus, the participants can move through their humour without unhealthily denying or deflecting the reality of their pain. They're not leaning on humour as a sole communication method, but one of the communication methods used to navigate their reality.
The Laughter of The West
On the opposite side of the cultural humour spectrum, we have the humour that dominates white, Western spaces. It is often satirical in nature. This humour behaves rather differently than that of the oppressed.
Today, Western humour about serious issues typically falls into two categories:
General satirical humour
Memes
Both function similarly.
To begin with: memes.
The widespread phenomenon of memes is sometimes called the “Memeification Culture”. A meme is a cultural item that is spread across the internet. It can be a picture, a phrase, a video. It is, in essence, a comical shorthand. Memeification is this process of turning complex events, concepts, or people into easily digestible, shareable, and humorous internet content. The memefying of communication and culture in the West has dramatically shifted how we communicate, from more nuanced or direct conversation, to irony-laced shorthand.
Secondly, we have the general satirical humour. This pops up in comic strips, mock news, talk shows, and political commentary programs. We have American examples such as The Daily Show, Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, Saturday Night Live (SNL), or the UK's Have I Got News For You. These programs take political and social issues and approach them through satire, bathing them in sarcasm, irony, and parody.
Regarding memes, they have at times served as a useful shorthand, particularly for younger generations, to connect and communicate large ideas and events with one another. Memes have even operated as a way to convey information and emotions without Boomers catching on to their meaning; a useful avenue when faced with a barrage of overly-critical, hostile reactions from an often-resentful, mocking demographic.
Satire has often been praised for having, unlike standard comedy meant purely for entertainment, a moral or constructive purpose—aiming to provoke thought, criticise power, or inspire social change.
When considering memes and satire, one might wonder how these humour types could be anything but praiseworthy. But there's a dark side to both. Particularly in the hands of the white West. Or rather, because they are in the hands of the white West. That dark side involves trivialising and even defusing the fire of social change.
The Dark Side of The Meme
In the case of memes, the constant memeifying of serious social or political issues can trivialise real-life crisis. Engaging chronically with serious issues through memes has a profound psychological effect of causing a digital desensitisation, wherein it makes audiences less empathetic to severe realities. It does this in several ways.
Firstly, it looks at a real and dark problem and then makes light of it. This repeated reaction trains the brain - builds neural pathways - that connect severe suffering and injustice with a lighthearted and non-urgent feeling. It trains the emotions to regard other people's pain, which is so often caused by white, Western systems, as lacking in importance. As trivial, minor, leisurely. You tell your system over and over to do nothing, to keep calm, to brush it off, to have no follow-up, to laugh.
When you grow up seeped in this culture, when this culture is a primary method of connecting and bonding with others and processing "big" issues, you are constantly being taught to react in one way over another. Human beings learn from others behaviour, leading to the collective behaviour. If we see a horrible suffering, followed by everyone making light and laughing about it, we are taught to chronically respond in the same way. It turns into an autonomic function.
Secondly, memeification approaches real problems and concrete realities by removing them from their appropriate, dark context. This can have a derealisation effect, almost making the reality of the oppressed feel like a story we are watching, instead of the truth real people are living.
The result of this divorce is a sanitation of suffering. The issue in question is moved three degrees left of what is tangible and legitimate. This causes participants in this humour-type to mentally distance themselves from, not only the suffering, but the sufferers themselves.
A wall rises, with an amused audience on one side, and the victims on the other. Again, this distancing induces an "othering", reinforcing the illusion that the suffering is "over there".
This illusion already permeates the West: Gaza, The Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Kashmir, Turtle Island, even the poorer side of town are resigned to the "far, far away" kingdom that we discuss, comment on, but never bring close. They hail from another dimension to which we have no connection, responsibility, or correlation. Thus, real victims become the paper people, with their paper problems; too distant to affect us, too far away to help. A part of us are even relieved by that fact since staring at that pain for too long is painful, frightening, and might threaten to overwhelm.
One example of how the memeification culture has functioned in recent times can be clearly seen in the discourse surrounding the Epstein Files.
The Epstein Files revealed to the public, without twist, spin, or sugarcoating, that a majority of our Western politicians, public leaders, celebrities, royalty, ultra wealthy, influencers, and high-ranking judicial authorities used a man called Jeffrey Epstein as their fixer and supplier of horrors.
Epstein has been proven to be a Zionist plant, recruited and trained as a spy for the Israeli government to ensure the success of the Zionist agenda in the West. As an Israeli intelligence asset and co-opted Mossad agent, Epstein was tasked with procuring the West's continued support and funding of the Zionist occupation of Palestine and its imperial expansion. The way all these wealthy and powerful people's loyalty was "locked in" was through a trusted and true method, used by other intelligence agencies such as the CIA. Namely, blackmailing.
Epstein was the supplier and facilitator to all these rich and wealthy Westerners for evils they couldn't do out in the open. Whatever crimes and horrors they could think of, he could supply. He connected clients to their nightmare desires. Raping children, pedophile, murder, torture, kidnapping, slavery, cannibalism, human sacrifice, occult ceremonies. Epstein facilitated it all. He put evil people in contact with other evil people, building a network of odious, loathsome individuals to better enable each other's savagery. He introduced the predators to their prey. In return, these clients supplied political, financial, media influence, and military loyalty to the Zionist cause.
Here's where the "files" come into it: Epstein kept records, (often in the form of email correspondence, photos, and video footage), of all of these acts, using the evidence as a blackmailing tool. The message to his clients was: “Well, if you don't support Israel, or have a change of mind, all of your sins will come to light.”
To avoid public and personal ruin, nearly all of these clients fell in line, or else faced literal and/or character assassination. That is the essence of the Epstein Files. They are his collected, blackmailing stash.
At first, when many of the files were made public, there was a great big shock as people went through them. Reading about Epstein and his clients removing children's teeth so that the minors couldn't bite when being forced to enact fellatio. Clients contacting a doctor to ask how to encourage an infant to suckle. They raped children, orchestrated sex trafficking, adults literally ate children - eating them, cooking them, expounding on the taste of children's flesh - flagrant cannibalism, forced child pregnancies. One witness testifies that, in 1984, when she was 13 years old, President Donald Trump was present as her newborn child (conceived through rape) was murdered and thrown into a lake in Michigan.
Many of these crimes were committed on "Epstein Island", referring to Little St. James, a 70-acre private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands purchased in 1998 by the convicted sex offender and Zionist fixer. It is infamous as the secluded compound where he and his associates brought underage girls to be trafficked and subjected to sexual abuse.
More of the Western wealthy, famous, and powerful are on the Jeffrey Epstein client list than not. And this entire operation leads back to Zionism and Israel. Considering the Epstein Files, these documents were some of the most abominable and damning evidence ever read by the public. And yet....
And yet...
What happened over the coming weeks and months after the release of the files? The white, Western corner of the internet got hold of it and they started churning out a host of comical, sarcastic, cynical memes about Epstein, Trump, about all of these pedophiles. Memes ranged from: “Hide your children, Trump is coming”, to photoshopped images of Trump and Epstein being effeminate lovers. Suddenly the discourse around crimes which should have caused in us all 100% pure horror and explosive rage – a rage which should cause everything to come grinding to a halt - was diffused through that humour. It turned shock into complacency. Memes had the power to normalise the most bone-chilling evil.
Memetic Warfare
It's not the first time memes have committed this normalisation act. Another recent example is that of Diddy and his trial, with the baby oil memes still circling the internet in droves. And, of course, the memification of Netanyahu in the midst of the Palestinian genocide has been widespread.
It's easy to "blame the youngsters" or roll our eyes at internet virality, but a lot of memification is simply a by-product of whiteness. It flows from white culture and how whiteness moves through the world. How? Well, whiteness avoids discomfort. Whiteness avoids accountability. It lacks empathy, thinks niceness equals goodness, is performative, and deeply insecure, leading to white fragility and defensiveness. Normalising and trivialising are just extensions of that culture.
Additionally, it would be a mistake to assume that these memes were made by bored teenagers. Rather, memification of many serious issues isn't an accident, but a deliberate manipulation and a coordinated attack originating from on high. This attack isn't coming from ordinary citizens, but from the official government.
In something called memetic warfare, the US government has openly admitted to utilising a modern form of information and psychological warfare which involves the propagating of internet memes on social media.
Sharing similarities with propaganda, memetic warfare aims to manipulate citizens; to desensitise them. The government owns massive meme accounts and pushes content to achieve Emotional Priming: when memes successfully bypass the logical filters of the brain, and appeal instead to a different emotional reaction.
This is a flooding and numbers game. Because of the sheer scale of government-led memetic warfare, when these memes go viral, it creates an illusion of consensus. The result? More individuals become likely to adopt a viewpoint if they believe that side is already winning or is the most popular take among their online tribe. Creating this consensus is called Social Proof. (Although our governments deny memetic warfare as being direct manipulation, calling it instead “cooperation”, it still remains a form of soft censorship and algorithmic governance.)
Humour and satire, in this way, makes us bypass our critical thinking.
The Defusing Trick
Like in the case of memes, there exists a dark side to Western satirical humour. We find it, for example, in talk shows and programs, ranging from The Daily Show to SNL, where the presenters deal with news of the tragic, racist, violent things that are happening in American politics and white society.
Centrists and Liberals will often applaud these sort of programs as being cutting-edge, speaking to power, and a thrilling defiance against the overlords. The satirist is considered daring and gutsy, the whole show feeling akin to illegal activity, the material feeling essentially like contraband. How often hasn't white society boasted of its own tolerance and freedom, using satire as proof in this claim?
One consequence of this impression is an emerging pretence of the "better white people". Those who sit in the centrist, liberal, and satirical camp are often painted as a more favourable flavour of white people. They earn their membership into this "better club" by flaunting more likeable characteristics than their right-wing counter-parts, such as self-depreciation.
We often like people who are able to laugh at themselves because we think this means they don't take themselves too seriously. And for some reason, we assume this equates to possessing some level of humility and even self-insight. (Though this may not be the case at all.)
Being able to laugh at their failures makes their shortcomings and imperfections appear almost endearing, and certainly more approachable. Thus, many conclude: “Look at these white people and how they are able to make fun of themselves. They aren't the bad ones. They're not trying to hide anything. They're all about truth and openness. They don't like the government any more than we do.” This assumption is a dangerous and tricky thing. Sometimes even a master manipulation.
As you begin to view the laughing crowd and the jesters more favourably, a slight of hand is happening right under your nose.
“Oh, they're so relatable.
They're not arrogant.
They're actually really humble.
They're charming.
They're allies!”
Meanwhile, a disappearance act happens: accountability quietly slips away.
In the humour-filled, humble-looking circus that is Western satirical entertainment, there is no real accountability being demanded of the producers or the audience. Satire and self-depreciation can be constructive tools, but only when accountability and just action follows.
If accountability doesn't join in with the satire, then it isn't only pointless, it is harmful. Why? Well, it all has to do with tension. When people witness injustice, their natural reaction should be rage, leading to action. Action in the form of opposing, dismantling, attacking the injustice. But instead, Western satire actually snuffs out the fire in that exchange. It removes the rage from the formula. And when you remove the rage, when you dampen it, you keep the next step from taking place too: namely, the serious action step. By removing rage, one replaces righteous anger with humour, amusement, and entertainment. We learn laughter instead of revolt as our outlet.
Rage and anger build tension inside of us. That anger can be very important. It can be mobilising, rousing, stirring, shifting. It can wake us up and help us act, similarly to how adrenaline can mobilise the body in ways a resting body won't move. Action is what is meant to be the mechanism of release of that rage and anger. But the Western satire-formula replaces the release you should experience from action, with the internal release you get from laughing instead. The humour diffuses the tension that should have lead to radicalisation and uprising.
Additionally, because many Westerners will feel that satire in itself is a bit mischievous, this mimics the experience of taking part in actual disrupting, prohibited acts of resistance. You come away from SNL feeling like Robin Hood, while all you've done is redirect the energy you ought to have used for actual protest towards brattish, taboo entertainment instead. This is sometimes referred to as Escapist Satisfaction.
Narcotising Dysfunction is another relevant term, coined by sociologists Paul Lazarsfeld and Robert K. Merton. It states that massive influxes of political media (especially entertaining or satirical formats) deceive consumers into confusing knowing about an issue, or laughing at it, with actually doing something about it. The entertainment value energises the audience psychologically, but narcotises them into physical, political apathy.
I might add that Western satire also sits on a scale, with some programs (SNL) being purely aimed at entertainment, versus a more useful show like John Oliver's Last Week Tonight, which offers deeper research, disseminates more timely information, and often, rightfully so, descends into expressions of rage in the passionate and intelligent voice of Oliver. So, not all these are exactly alike, but they still sit on a scale of the same problem. The problem being that these satirical shows are still constrained by the expectation to add entertainment amid the criticism. Avoiding true disruption and being more spectacle is precisely why they're allowed to continue being on the air. Capitalism still drives that machine.
Yes, laughing at our leaders, inept governments, and serious issue seems harmless enough. “It takes the edge off.” But it is often harmful and sedates the masses when wielded by white, Western hands. “Yes, of course we don't like Trump, but we'll make a few memes about him looking like a pig or being overweight or wearing a diaper. Now we all feel better. We got our little jab in. We acted like petulant, teenage bullies and now we're fine. We've made fun of our overlords – what deliciously illicit fun! No need to protest. No need to resist. No need to boycott or take up arms. No need to do uncomfortable soul-digging. No need for sabotage. No need for uprising or resistance. Because, by getting together and laughing today, we've shown that we're not on the side of the monsters, the racists, the murderers, the wealthy.” We're fine. We're the good guys.
Not The Same
Do you see the difference between these two humours? One is the humour used by traumatised, oppressed groups belonging to the global majority, aiming to help them get through their hardships and release an ounce of the stress that is constantly building just by trying to survive in the West and dealing with whiteness. It also serves as resistance. The other is white society avoiding accountability, avoiding uncomfortable truth, and avoiding action by leaning on satire as a way to absolve them of their responsibility. They get to look like heroes and rebels, but in reality risk nothing.
The overuse of satire frequently acts as an emotional buffer, allowing the West to deflect. By transforming systemic oppression and geopolitical harm into subjects of irony and humour, used for our emotional calming and amusement, white society continuously normalises these issues, making it easier for dominant powers to avoid facing concrete consequences for their actions. “Well, I made a joke about it. Well, I made a funny song about it. Well, I made a meme about it and I posted on the internet. I'm done. I feel all better now.” This is just another form of performative allyship.
Additionally, the people in our society who don't want to memeify other's suffering, those who don't want to put a fun spin on their own oppression, who don't want to laugh at their trauma, are often subtly or directly criticised for it. “Oh, come on. We have to laugh about these things. If we don't laugh we'll cry. Have a sense of humour. It'll keep you young. It'll keep you sane. Loosen up. Don't live in the past. Take a day off. This isn't the time. This isn't the right platform. You know, if you talk about the racism, the genocide, the micro-aggressions in a more approachable and softer way, you'll get more people to listen to you. Put on some charm. You win more with honey than with vinegar, you know! Don't want to seem bitter or overly aggressive. That'll just harm your cause in the long-run”. With this kind of messaging, white people are, in fact, once again, centering themselves: their own comfort. They are demanding that their victims dance for them once more. And in the process, they are attempting to control how oppressed people express their pain and resistance.
Those suffering under the extreme evils of white supremacy not only have to deal with that pain, but are also pressured into minimising and making lighter of their own annihilation and horrors. "Sure, you can talk about your struggles, but make it fun for us! Entertain us!" Even Black and Brown people's humour is taken from them, appropriated, twisted, and turned back against them.
Final Thought
As we traverse the wilds of the internet, and note the things we laugh about. we must examine not just the topics we engage with, but how we engage with them. There is a throng of alternatives beyond memifying the pain of the oppressed and victims.
A huge part of unlearning white supremacy is learning to sit with discomfort and move through it in healthier ways. It is letting go of the feeling that you're entitled to the amusement of the oppressed when things get heavy. It might even be unlearning the deflecting method white society taught you to process your own pain, insisting it's "the only way". There are other ways - ways that won't drown you.
The humour that is the sacred, survival-enabling spaces of the global majority is not the same as the conscience-dampening, accountability-loop-hole that is white, Western satire. We must call out, identify, and push away from what keeps us numbed and distracted from acting. Otherwise we permit white power to continue to use and manipulate us, while also betraying victims. Allow the tension to build, and then wield it like the catalyst its meant to be.
It is so little to ask that we do not make light of what is extremely weighty and real. Other's pain is not there to feed our entertainment appetite. Lay aside the clown costume and get serious.
__________________________________________
Comments