Election season often leaves Americans feeling more exhausted than excited about exercising their right to vote. Political discussions can become so contentious that people avoid talking about them, even among friends. 

The ability to needle politicians through mockery and satire is another historic right, one enshrined in the First Amendment. Pithy lines made by Benjamin Franklin have cemented themselves into public consciousness, long after the specific incidents he was commenting on during the American Revolution.

“Political life has been awash with laughter for a while now,” says Dr. Patrick Giamario, associate professor of political science at UNC Greensboro. He explores the evolution of political humor in his book “Laughter as Politics: Critical Theory in an Age of Hilarity.”

According to Giamario, fear surrounding the upcoming elections and the instability of society in general has fueled a desire for humorous takes. “It’s a symptom of this time we’re in, with a lot up for grabs,” he says.

His term “Age of Hilarity” tries to make sense of the proliferation and democratization of humor, spurred on by decentralized and easy-to-access technology and media platforms.

“In the 19th century, the main form of political humor would be cartoons, and some were quite brilliant, biting, and powerful,” he says. “In the 20th century, we saw late night TV hosts and a few comedians doing HBO comedy specials. That brings us to where we are now. Everyone can engage in X memes and trolling. They can make funny videos on TikTok. I think it’s interesting – promising in some ways but worrying in other ways.” 

How Laughing Affects Political Engagement

For his research, Giamario studied philosophers of laughter such as Thomas Hobbes and modern faces of the comic scene such as Hannah Gadsby. He posed a question: is laughing at politics always beneficial, or can it do more harm than good?

“The philosophical and historical lineage of this notion is that when we laugh at politicians and political controversies, no matter what party they’re from, we’re freeing ourselves from them, and we’re refusing to be governed,” says Giamario. He says it may be more complicated than that. “I reconsidered this traditional philosophical question of, ‘Should we be taking things more seriously, or should we be laughing more about them?’ and instead focused on how the experience of laughter itself participates in the political process “

One issue he found is that comedy can reinforce harmful stereotypes and discriminatory practices. However, even when humor takes aim at prejudice or a societal controversy, he says it may dampen the audience’s motivation to engage in activism or other change. He explained, “When people laugh, it may result in them feeling temporarily better. Then they think they can set that anger aside.” 

Giamario tries to reframe laughter as a “site” of politics in society. “Experiences of laughter highlight and sometimes intensify fragilities or fractures in our shared social setting,” he says. “For example, we may laugh at things that don’t feel quite right, or when something unexpected happens. That’s a site of conflict or uncertainty. And that’s where politics happen.” 

Shaking Things Up 

Political humor has expanded from cartoons in pamphlets to stand-up specials on streaming networks. One person with a camera and a TikTok or Twitch account can grow an audience as big as someone with a million-dollar TV studio and a Hollywood agent. The use of likes and shares on social media can turn political takes into competitions. 

Giamario says people should pay attention to the situation in which the humor occurs. “A lot of humor becomes mere entertainment,” he says. “A late-night TV show host making fun of the president may sound subversive or transgressive because they’re making fun of the most powerful person in the country. But they’re also trying to sell tickets or advertising. It can be quite cynical. Unfortunately, I think that’s where a lot of political humor has gone in the last decade.”

When considering how the public enjoys political humor, Giamario advises people to approach it with intention and introspection. Does humor influence an action? Are biases involved? Does humor impede motivation to act on beliefs and push for change when it’s needed?

“What’s promising about laughter is its aesthetic effect,” says Giamario. “It shakes people, quite literally, in a physical sense. It shakes the body out of conventional, existing ways of thinking, whether it’s social, political, religious, or something else.” 

Giamario will keep exploring the nuance of political engagement. He is currently working on a book about deception in politics. For now, during this election year, he encourages voters to think critically and stay involved, even when they feel burnt out.

“There’s no sort of easy out for politics,” says Giamario. “You’re engaged in it all the time, whether you recognize it or not. The question becomes, ‘how do you want to engage in it?'”

Story by Janet Imrick, University Communications
Photography from AdobeStock
Additional photography courtesy of Edinburgh University Press and Ali Goldstein, Netflix