Positive Propaganda: Dave Chappelle and his White Buddy “Chip”

This video highlights, by way of humorous understatement in a short narrative, the very completely different experiences white and black individuals usually have with the police. An in any other case troublesome and uncomfortable difficulty is raised in a non-threatening, playful, but important method.

Any dialogue of race and racism within the U.S. not too long ago may be treacherous, so understatement generally is a profitable, oblique method. That’s what Chappelle is perhaps doing on this quick narrative, which probably will not be composed of fully true claims (does he also have a white good friend named “Chip”?), as Chappelle was not overwhelmed by cops who then framed him by planting medication on him, as he later suggests within the efficiency. However it’s no much less informative nor extra misleading than many different moral thought experiments in philosophy or political beliefs that make use of appeals to feelings along with rational argument.

Many philosophically fascinating issues come up instantly with this clip.

Is it acceptable to indicate at school comedians who’ve not too long ago been accused of “punching down” on these with out social energy, corresponding to LGBTQ of us?

On this dialogue, we even have an introduction to the notion of “intersectionality” round oppression, and the varied energy dynamics usually concerned that make issues way more advanced than standard discussions sometimes permit; Chappelle is ready of energy in relation to black ladies and LGBTQ of us, however not essentially in relation to white ladies or males. These are among the first points we wade into earlier than we get to issues of rhetoric and propaganda.

One query college students are seemingly inherently occupied with is “When is it incorrect to snigger?” Not surprisingly, there’s a huge spectrum of responses right here, and this can be very essential that such discussions do not occur previous to establishing some rapport with college students and some extent of communal values accepted by the category. Ideally that is addressed very early within the semester, the place the scholars collaborate on classroom values that all of them comply with observe, particularly as they’re knowledgeable that we are going to be engaged in deep discussions about issues everybody says we should always not discuss in public: politics, faith, ethics, and the climate (sure, an odd one, however there’s that local weather change matter). These agreed upon values may be so simple as “Argument is not battle,” and philosophical critique of 1’s place doesn’t entail an assault on one’s essence, character, or identification. As soon as established, and referenced on a continuous foundation, questions on what is acceptable to snigger at and what’s not, and what does laughter at one thing many would possibly deem inappropriate entail in regards to the laugher (if something), may be brazenly and freely mentioned.  

“That shit is fucking unimaginable.”

We will study the excellence between “expressive” makes use of of express language, in distinction to “aggressive” or “attacking” makes use of. A case may be made right here that Chappelle makes use of the previous to focus on one thing that must be seen as incongruous, absurd, “unimaginable,” however so usually stays hidden in plain sight resulting from having been normalized, usually via the adverse form of propaganda Jason Stanley (in How Propaganda Works) worries about. Maybe humor, and artwork normally, can act as a subversive, even propagandistic (in Du Bois’ optimistic sense) software to lift consciousness in a approach different extra direct modes of resistance merely can not. This query opens up discussions on the extra basic use of rhetoric and when it would ever be utilized in an appropriate vogue. College students are nearly all the time divided right here.

The main focus of the piece is the talk between W.E.B. Du Bois and Alain Locke on propaganda.

Is it ever acceptable to enchantment to feelings, as Chappelle and different socially aware comedians do, in an effort to influence?

We ponder whether conventional or easy strategies of resistance are ever actually that efficient towards the adverse propaganda that’s so widespread. At instances, the extra astute college students will make their very own connections between propaganda, disinformation, and sure rhetorical techniques (all of which have been lined in prior classes) utilized in persuasion. In different instances, I’ve to ask them whether or not there are such connections, and in that case, does this imply rhetoric or propaganda ought to by no means be used. Given the 2 readings from Du Bois (who helps “optimistic propaganda”) and Locke (who’s towards all types of propaganda), we have now the context to handle the type of artwork utilized in Chappelle’s performances: Is it mere artwork? Is it subversive artwork? Is it akin to pure rhetoric of the type Socrates and Plato fearful about? Is it a species of propaganda, and in that case, is it acceptable to make use of in his scenario? Are there arguments embedded throughout the rhetoric/propaganda?

Relatedly, are such comedians actually on this ethical-epistemological endeavor, or are they merely out for laughs? Normally, college students acknowledge that there’s (or may be unearthed) an argument beneath the humorous rhetoric that encourages us to deliver to consciousness two sharply divergent experiences (between white and black of us), the place Chappelle is displaying a reality. However as Kierkegaard reminds us in his The Idea of Irony, “Irony [and humor] requires sturdy distinction and would completely vanish in such boring firm as argumentation” (90), so easy logic won’t all the time be the perfect mode of presentation even when cause, information, and justification are in your facet. Robust to listen to if you happen to train logic (Kierkegaard’s citation is perhaps used, however college students are not required to learn in full nor any a part of his dissertation. Such compulsion would possibly quantity to a type of oppression).

Lastly, I usually discover it enjoyable, however doubtlessly considerably dangerous, to start the category wherein we cowl this difficulty with an anecdote from my very own life. I inform them of a time I used to be at a barber store sitting within the huge chair when a bottle (plastic and empty) fell onto my head. I used to be stunned, and the barber apologized profusely, claiming that the employees there had been complaining in regards to the risks of getting the cabinets proper above the chairs. So, I went to the managers, informed them what occurred, and, feigning anger, I threatened to sue the store if no modifications have been made. It labored. College students are then requested whether or not what I did was dishonest, immoral, purely rhetorical, or perhaps a type of propaganda. They’re divided on this level, however most appear open to viewing the optimistic penalties as justification for the trickery (sure, they declare, the ends justified the means). Then I gently, and considerably apologetically, inform them that such issues by no means truly occurred—to me. This was a narrative of occasions that purportedly occurred to Martha Nussbaum (Anger and Forgiveness 150).^[1]

So, maybe I lied? Or was I merely performing propaganda, and thus revealing a doable reality?

If it was not solely trustworthy, was it then not acceptable for pedagogical functions? Extra enjoyable divisions amongst college students right here. In any case, ultimately I guarantee them I can’t do such a factor once more.

Additional Studying:

Du Bois, W.E.B. “Standards of Negro Artwork” in The Philosophies of America Reader. Edited by Kim Diaz and Mathew A. Faust. London: Bloomsbury Tutorial, (2021/1926), 216-221.

Kramer, Chris A. “Dave Chappelle’s Constructive Propaganda.” In Dave Chappelle and Philosophy: When Conserving it Flawed Will get Actual. Edited by Mark Ralkowski. Chicago: Open Universe, 2021. Pgs. 75-87.

Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Stay By. Chicago, IL: College of Chicago Press, 1980. (concentrate on chapter 2).

Locke, Alain. “Artwork or Propaganda?” in The Philosophies of America Reader. Edited by Kim Diaz and Mathew A. Faust. London: Bloomsbury Tutorial, (2021/1928), 222-224.

Nussbaum, Martha. Anger and Forgiveness: Resentment, Generosity, Justice. New York: Oxford College Press, 2016. 

Stanley, Jason. How Propaganda Works. New Jersey: Princeton College Press, 2015.

^[1] Right here is Nussbaum’s description of occasions that occurred to her: “What a few efficiency of anger? Typically, when anger will not be an actual temptation, a efficiency achieves good outcomes, significantly in our litigious tradition. One Saturday my hair stylist, as I used to be leaning again with my head within the sink for a wash, reached up for the shampoo, opening an ill-organized cupboard out of which varied bottles fell, and one—plastic, fortunately—hit me on the forehead. I used to be startled however probably not harm or upset. However I believed it was helpful to sign to others the importance of this occasion, since another person may very well be significantly harm in future (if a heavier bottle had fallen, or it had damaged). So I gave a show of well mannered outrage, including that they actually ought to set up a rack in that cupboard to carry the bottles securely. Sure, the hairdresser replied, we’ve informed that to administration for weeks. So, I repeated the efficiency with heightened vigor on the entrance desk, perceiving that this may assist each the workers and the purchasers, and counting on the standard American concern of a lawsuit. This case appears to me just like the Utku interpretation of Jesus within the temple: giving the culturally anticipated efficiency, to be able to produce good outcomes. Let’s give Seneca credit score once more: the additional it’s from actual anger, the simpler it’s to manage and modulate. The efficiency achieved the outcome that anger-as-signal-to-others may need achieved, with extra reliability. Even a short second of actual anger may have inflated itself into an try to humiliate these individuals and make them really feel terrible. A efficiency geared toward good social outcomes carries no such danger. Transition-Anger, poised within the center, is one other cheap response, however it’s a little riskier than a mere efficiency, able to sliding imperceptibly into actual anger” (150). 

The Teaching and Learning Video Series is designed to share pedagogical approaches to utilizing humorous video clips for educating philosophy. Humor, when used appropriately, has empirically been proven to correlate with greater retention charges. If you’re occupied with contributing to this sequence, please e-mail the Sequence Editor, William A. B. Parkhurst at parkhurw@gvsu.edu