Humor is one of the oldest and most dangerous weapons against political oppression. It neutralizes intimidation and dissolves fear. Power fears it because it undermines the most important foundation of authority and domination: prestige. What can be laughed at no longer needs to be feared. Laughter does not change a political system, but it changes the relationship to it. Every oppressive power wants to appear authoritative, something to be feared. Power, in turn, fears becoming ridiculous. That is why authoritarian systems instinctively fear humor, and why humor becomes one of the most important tools of freedom, and a target of oppressive regimes.
This was the subject of a press briefing organized by American Community Media, featuring American comedians Herbert Siguenza, resident artist at SDSU ArtsAlive and founding member of Culture Clash, Emil Amok Guillermo, journalist, comedian and poet laureate, and Samson Koletkar, co-founder of the Desi Comedy Fest and Comedy Oakland. Many people think humor is an easy genre, but it may be the most difficult, and it is not without risk. What many do not realize is that humor and comedians can be a greater adversary to power than opposition politicians. Yet this is not an easy craft. One must find the subject and the boundary so that it does not backfire. “How do you joke about ICE when people are being pulled from their cars, from their homes, when children are being separated from their parents?” Siguenza asked. And yet even a funeral is better when someone tells humorous stories about the deceased.
The roots of political humor go back to antiquity. In Athenian democracy, the comedies of Aristophanes openly mocked politicians, war, and the contradictions of public life. In the Middle Ages, the court jester was the only one who could tell the king the truth without punishment, precisely because he disguised it as a joke. Humor has always found its way to power, because what could not be said openly could be expressed through laughter. Even the servants of tyrannical power feared it, and those around dictators were not safe either, which is why only the court jester could speak the truth. Humor functions as feedback within the dictator’s circle, and as a sharp weapon outside of it. Good humor is never partisan or biased, but points out contradictions.
In the modern era, humor has played a particularly important role in the struggle against authoritarian systems. In Eastern European dictatorships, political jokes spread by word of mouth, creating a kind of parallel public sphere. People found community in laughter, and many found refuge in humor. A well-known joke did not just entertain, it signaled: you are not alone, others see reality too. Humor was therefore not only criticism, but a force for building community. Under socialism, certain jokes became proverbial, even though everyone knew where the limits were in public. Even so, they had a liberating effect. In Hungary, Géza Hofi, while loyal to the system, also helped consolidate it, yet at the same time contributed to preparing its transition.
One of the most important functions of humor is that it relieves fear. Dictatorship is built on fear, and humor dismantles it. When someone laughs at power, they no longer fear it in the same way. Laughter relativizes, exposes, and brings down to human scale what once seemed frightening and invincible. This is an extremely dangerous process for power, because the loss of prestige often precedes political collapse. First people laugh at the tyrant, then they no longer fear him, and eventually comes the moment when they resist him. The anger that leads to regime change is preceded by laughter that dissolves fear. What becomes ridiculous is no longer frightening. According to Siguenza, humor acts like an antibiotic against sadness in the world.
In American political culture, humor also exists in institutionalized forms. Late-night talk shows, satirical news programs, and stand-up comedy are important arenas of political opinion-making. These shows not only reflect on daily politics, they interpret it. Humor here is not an escape, but a framework of interpretation. A well-crafted joke often points more precisely to a political absurdity than a long analysis. The most effective form of humor is the absurd, which exposes the contradictions and distortions of power. The comedian is not only funny, but outspoken. Taboos are first broken by comedians.
Humor arises from pain and tension, and when tension is high and pain is real and overwhelming, that is the perfect moment for humor. Humor has always been part of the journalistic toolkit, applying what Guillermo calls the Mary Poppins theory: a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down. Humor should be used in journalism as well, said Guillermo, who as a journalist wields humor as a weapon. He says humor is subjective, you either laugh or cry at it. But the task of the comedian is to puncture big bubbles and try to uncover and expose the truth. A comedian must be aware of themselves, but must not practice self-censorship in telling the truth, he added. The comedian is the bravest journalist.
According to Samson Koletkar, humor is agreement: if you laugh, you agree with me. This agreement is immediate. Comedians have no filter. The shock comes from the fact that someone actually said out loud what others did not dare to say. When people do not laugh, they slightly change their principles or their sense of truth. Humor helps us return to ourselves. If you ever tell a comedian not to talk about something, they will talk about it even more. Because then it must be talked about. “Sometimes I get feedback telling me to go back to where I came from,” he says. But the more comedians I listened to, the more I realized that we are all the same.
Koletkar says there will always be jokes that are more rooted in your cultural identity. America is the forerunner of “you can say what you think” and “you can joke.” America is the mecca of stand-up. There is no other country as free in joking as America. You can tell America is changing when its relationship to humor changes. Humor is always rebellion. It does not take a dictatorship; democracies also provide plenty of material for comedians. Democracies need comedians just as much as dictatorships do. For example, to prevent becoming a dictatorship. Or to reveal what is false. This is part of social self-examination and social health.
The tools of humor are diverse. Irony creates distance, satire exaggerates contradictions, parody holds up a mirror, and the grotesque deliberately distorts to make distortion visible. These tools not only amuse, but force us to think. Good political humor is always more than a joke. It interprets, exposes, and takes a stand. The question arises whether humor can be pro-government. The answer is yes, but it is rarely credible. Humor close to power easily becomes propaganda or flattery. When humor punches down instead of up, it loses its critical edge. At the same time, there are cases when power practices self-irony to strengthen its legitimacy.
This is always a risky game, because self-irony can easily turn into genuine criticism. True dictatorships have no sense of humor and no self-criticism. If a power has self-criticism and self-irony, it is no longer a frightening power. Dictators sometimes understand humor, they just do not like it. That is why comedians often become political targets. Not because they have power, but because they have influence. Humor can shape public opinion, influence political sensitivity, and dismantle propaganda narratives. Power senses this precisely. That is why it tries to delegitimize, silence, or ridicule comedians themselves. Fascism silences comedians first, Siguenza said. Even the court jester will be beheaded if he crosses a line the power can tolerate.
In recent years, it has also become observable in American politics that power reacts increasingly aggressively to humor. Critical shows and performers regularly become targets of political attacks. In the rhetoric of power, humor is not opinion but a hostile political attack. The goal is to make the audience perceive humor not as entertainment but as a threat, and therefore to discredit it, criminalize it, and present it as political manipulation. There are often efforts to portray comedians or their shows as agents funded and hired by someone. This strategy often backfires, because it reinforces the perception that humor is indeed capable of touching the sensitive points of power. They managed to silence Stephen Colbert’s late-night show, but Jimmy Kimmel could only be forced off the screen for five days, and South Park is still running.
Humor, therefore, is not merely a byproduct of politics, but an active participant. It does not topple governments, but it can contribute to the loss of their aura. It does not organize movements, but it can create community. It does not provide ready-made answers, but it helps us recognize the questions. Perhaps most importantly, humor remains human in an inhuman environment. When politics becomes brutal, when language is emptied, when fear prevails, humor reminds us that there is another reality. A reality where it is still possible to laugh, and where laughter is not escape, but resistance.
