No Laughing Matter
Hello. Brief, unsettling item today. I believe it is symptomatic of what is happening in the world in the era of nationalist, authoritarian governments that are opposed to robust thought — part and parcel of the same philosophy of those who extort colleges, because critical thinking can challenge the lies the authoritarians tell.
The guy above is Leo Lins, a standup comic from Brazil. His humor is of the edgy, acid variety — funny but over-the-top-nasty jokes targeting almost every vulnerable, marginalized group: Black people, evangelicals, indigenous people, obese people, elderly people, gay people, Jews, impoverished northeastern Brazilians, disabled people and those with HIV. It’s his shtick, which is based on the idea — warranted or not — that when you are scattershot offensive to everyone, when you are targeting everyone, being promiscuously cruel to everyone, you are actually targeting no one. It’s essentially a continuing joke about the joke — about the ridiculousness of stereotyping. I get this. I don’t always love it, but I buy it.
Lins’s stuff is not easily translatable — he performs in Portuguese — but his shtick is pretty much Jimmy Carr’s shtick. Same engine behind it. And Jimmy Carr is an international star.
Lins has just been sentenced to eight years in prison by the Brazilian courts for “inciting intolerance.” The charge was based on a single gig in 2022 that has had millions of youtube viewings, from 2022.
The judge’s decision in the case concluded: “Freedom of expression is not absolute nor unlimited. When there is a confrontation between the fundamental precept of liberty of expression and the principles of human dignity and judicial equality, the latter should win out.”
To put things in perspective, in the gig, Lins said this, quite transparently:
“I make jokes about everything and everyone. What show could be more inclusive? I even hired a sign language interpreter just to be able to offend the deaf-mute.”
I don’t know the specific political machinations behind this arrest — the president of Brazil is often described as a left-wing autocrat, and his predecessor was a right-wing fascist — but whatever the cause, democracies that are committed to free speech should be appalled. It seems symptomatic of global changes in the willingness of governments to be openly repressive, openly strangling free speech. Sort of like using police power in Los Angeles to violently repress street demonstrations against the government.
The persecution of comedians is, obviously, nothing new. It is a weapon of autocracies because edgy comedians often bluntly expose and ridicule uncomfortable truths about abuses of power. Sixty years ago, Lenny Bruce was arrested for saying “cocksuckers” in a performance in San Francisco — the powers that be felt he was being a deliberate provocateur of them, and a threat to the public weal — and afterwards Bruce was continually harassed by police authorities for alleged obscenities, and was bullet-targeted in narcotics sting investigations, leading to several trials that bankrupted the comedian. Dispirited, desperate, and bloated from overeating and over-drinking and over-drugging in his despair, he died of a morphine overdose at the age of 40, in 1966.
It’s difficult to face what is going on in the world right now. In my opinion, this Lins case is no small thing. It is indicative of something much larger.
—
By the way, I do not consider this tasteless. It’s a joke I have repeated often:
Why do Jews wear those beanies? Because the little propeller would cost extra.
It is a joke about silly stereotypes. Humor is complicated.
The persecution of Leo Lins is pathetic and dangerous. Governments are not valid judges of humor. They may be the worst judges of humor in the world.
—
Today’s Gene Pool Gene Poll:
Okay, see you back here soon.
I’m confused about your question. You asked if Leo Lins’ ARREST was dreadful, not so bad, etc. I’d have to say the ARREST did not go so far as to be ”dreadful,” but the SENTENCING certainly did. Eight years (or even eight weeks) for spewing offensive material (that does not advocate violence) is way over the top.
I am shocked that 13% (of the readers of this Substack, of all people!) do not think that imprisoning someone for eight years for his speech is dreadful. Even people who don't care about freedom of speech should think that it's dreadful to sentence him to eight years. Can you imagine eight years in prison? Eight days would have been sufficient to teach him a lesson (if he needed one). He would not have resumed his act after eight days in prison, knowing that a second offense would get him a longer sentence.