Humor and Memes in Politics

Jordyn Wald on November 5, 2024

Donald Trump with a red background and Kamala Harris with a blue background. Photo by author, Jordyn Wald, CC0 (no rights reserved).

Humor isn’t just amusement—it also reflects the dynamics of society. Humor can reinforce group identities, challenge authority, mobilize others to drive social change – and it helps us talk about social tensions in a way that feels easier to handle. This holds in politics as much as other social domains. In politics, humor helps people connect with candidates, rally support, and make sense of tough issues. In today’s election, supporters use memes and humor to boost candidates’ images, mock opponents, and generate political engagement.

Political Participation

Humor and memes can inspire public participation in political conversations and support social action by spreading viral messages that strengthen group identity or challenge opponents. As participatory media, memes encourage users to remix content, making complex political issues more accessible and engaging. By framing critiques as “just jokes,” the public can combine humor with political critique, capture more attention, impact public opinion, and reduce tension.

For example, during the 2016 U.S. presidential election, memes like “Basket of Deplorables” and “Nasty Woman” became rallying cries and cultural tools to 1) mock opponents, 2) signal political affiliation and 3) be politically engaged. In the 2024 election, supporters are once again using memes to make political points. These include exaggerated AI-generated memes geared to boost Donald Trump’s image as strong and confident, or memes that turn Kamala Harris’ past criticisms with a lighthearted tone to boost her image as approachable and resilient.

Political Protest and Opposition

Humor in protests and political opposition can empower activists to challenge authority and express discontent. In social movements, it delivers powerful messages, strengthens group bonds, and provides emotional support. Humor also makes challenging authority feel less confrontational, allowing for open conversations about change. Through satire, irony, and parody, activists connect emotionally with audiences, question power structures, and make complex issues more approachable. 

However, while humor can reveal flaws in those in power, its playful nature risks being misunderstood if not used carefully. For instance, humor’s lightheartedness can weaken messages when audiences miss the criticism or view it as only entertainment.

Humor Styles and Political Appeal

Researchers have shown that humor in political messages can impact a politician’s appeal and voter support, depending on the type of humor. Karakaya and Edgell found that right-wing politicians, like Trump, often use confrontational humor to strengthen support among their base, especially among those frustrated with political elites. Trump’s outspoken humor, inspired by stand-up and sports culture, portrays him as a bold challenger of the political system, appealing to his supporters but potentially pushing away moderates who find it polarizing.

Generally, both left and right wing politicians often use humor as a tactic to address social issues and critique those in power. By employing self-mocking or inclusive jokes, politicians can connect more broadly with audiences, deflect criticism, and enhance the relatability of their messages. For instance, Kamala Harris uses humor in her challenge to Donald Trump to “say it to my face” aiming to deflect criticism and connect with her audience, while Donald Trump often uses sarcasm to deflect accusations and build a strong base of supporters.

Although political humor from both sides can boost likability, it risks backfiring if it feels insincere or too harsh, making politicians seem unapproachable and turning voters away. Any type of humor—whether aggressive, self-mocking, or inclusive—loses its impact when it feels forced or overdone.

When Studying Humor Gets Too Serious

Funny enough, social scientists studying humor, however, are often called out for “taking the fun out of it” – overanalyzing jokes and memes with theories that strip away their spontaneity and enjoyment. This creates a paradox: while humor offers valuable insights into social boundaries, challenges to authority, and the ways we build connections, studying it too closely can strip away the very lightheartedness that makes it engaging in the first place. As E.B. White put it, ‘Analyzing humor is like dissecting a frog. Few people are interested and the frog dies of it.’ Yet, understanding humor’s role gives us valuable insight into how it shapes our social and political landscape.

What “They” Don’t Want You to Know About Conspiracy Theories

S Ericson on October 30, 2024

A young man holding a pamphlet labeled “The Truth”, donning a red, striped tie and tin-foil hat. “Conspiracy Nut” by Will is licensed under CC BY 2.0 on Flickr.

Is there “a single group of people who secretly control events and rule the world together”? According to a December 2023 poll by YouGov, 41% of Americans think so. Even more – 54% – said Lee Harvey Oswald wasn’t acting alone when he shot President John F. Kennedy. No matter how you slice it, belief in conspiracy theories is widespread. But what actually is a conspiracy theory? And why do so many people believe in them, while others don’t? There’s a wide array of social science research that has tried to answer these and other questions related to these controversial ideas.

What is a Conspiracy Theory, Anyway?

Scholars have offered multiple definitions of a conspiracy theory. According to one definition, a conspiracy theory alleges that “powerful and secretive groups” of people are engaged in some kind of evil and secret activity. In another definition, the conspiratorial worldview has three main components. 1) “nothing happens by accident”: world events almost always happen because someone intended for them to happen. 2) “nothing is as it seems”: agents of the conspiracy are lying to you. 3) “everything is connected”: secret patterns are everywhere.

Why Do People Believe?

Many different people believe in many different conspiracy theories for many different reasons. Nonetheless, people are more likely to believe in some circumstances more than others. In general, people are more likely to believe conspiracy theories that portray their political opponents negatively. Also, people who know a lot about politics but don’t trust either powerful institutions or other people very much are especially likely to believe in conspiracy theories. 

One recent paper found that conspiracy beliefs are “U-shaped”: those at the top and bottom of the socioeconomic ladder are more likely to believe in them, while people in the middle are less likely to believe. People are also more likely to believe in conspiracy theories during potentially threatening or insecure times in society, such as higher levels of unemployment, as well as political and demographic changes.

Mixing It Up

Scholars have compared conspiracy theories to other types of ideas, including rumors, folk theories, and fake news. Whatever we call them, the things we think we know are always grounded in our communities and social norms. The truth is always contested. The social construction of “knowledge” is especially true for subjects where most non-specialists don’t have a lot of prior experience, such as science or medicine. 

Conspiracy theories are an example of “stigmatized knowledge”: ideas that are denied by mainstream institutions like universities, the scientific community, and the government. Some argue that these ideas are becoming more mainstream, in part thanks to the internet and declining trust in authority. Some scholars claim that, while promoters of stigmatized ideas oppose what they view as the mainstream, they are often receptive to each other’s beliefs. For example, one study found that after people started believing in conspiracy theories about the COVID-19 pandemic, they often started to hold more conspiratorial beliefs in general.

Restorative Justice

jake on October 24, 2024

Green grass with morning dew clinging and glowing in the sunlight. Image by Nandhu Kumar from Pexels is licensed under Pexels license.

When a crime is committed, the harm done to victims and communities can rarely be healed by writing a check or locking someone up. Yet the U.S. criminal justice system’s approach relies heavily on fines and incarceration to punish those who have harmed others. These sanctions fall heaviest on those with the least ability to pay, particularly minoritized groups, leading to a domino effect of harm on individuals, families, and communities. Researchers have long criticized these responses as ineffective at best and, at worst, contributing to greater harm and  recidivism. As a result, there have been calls for new approaches to justice.

What is Restorative Justice?

Restorative Justice (RJ) is an approach that operates alongside or in lieu of traditional criminal justice, as in school, workplace, and other settings as well. It encompasses a variety of practices, often derived from Indigenous cultural traditions, such as the “circle process” and “victim-offender conferencing.” Unlike the standard U.S. system, which views crime as a violation of the law against the government, RJ focuses on the harm caused to relationships. It does this by 1) empowering those harmed and the community to decide how to address the harm and 2) encouraging those responsible to face the affected individuals and take direct accountability, when appropriate.

RJ, in its reactive form, a trained facilitator organizes structured meetings between those involved in an incident to address and resolve the harm caused. Proactively, RJ can involve gatherings where people socialize and strengthen relationships – in the absence of a specific incident. Generally, RJ is used reactively and during these meetings three key questions are discussed: 1) What happened? 2) What have the impacts been? and 3) What can be done to make things better?

For instance, imagine a parent allowed their child to wait at the bus stop near their home. A neighbor’s German Shepherd, often left unsupervised, starts frequenting the area and one day bites the child. This incident sparks conflict between the dog’s owner and the concerned parent. A typical response might involve fining the dog owner and requiring them to keep the dog confined, which could escalate tensions in the neighborhood between dog lovers and concerned parents.

In contrast, a Restorative Justice (RJ) process would bring together the dog owner, the child and their parents, and other concerned neighbors to address the situation. Through open discussions, questions and different perspectives would be explored, allowing all parties to express their concerns and needs. This could lead to creative solutions, such as the dog owner agreeing to better supervision or installing a secure fence, while the community works together to ensure the safety of children at the bus stop by taking turns waiting with the children. Ultimately, this approach could not only resolve the issue but also foster a stronger sense of trust and cooperation within the neighborhood.

Does Restorative Justice Work?

For over 40 years, research assessing the effectiveness of RJ has consistently shown it to be a relatively better solution for a range of minor-to-serious crimes. First, people who participate in RJ instead of the traditional process (fines and jail) had significantly lower rates of repeating harm. Second, people who were harmed felt RJ was more inclusive to them than the traditional process, and those involved in more serious-incidents experienced lower rates of PTSD symptoms. Third and lastly, RJ was significantly cheaper than the court process and empowering to communities. Overall, RJ is a well-established, evidence-based practice that is growing a viable response to both property and violent crimes.

Restorative Justice is Growing.

There has been significant growth and adoption of RJ around the world, with the United States, Canada, The United Kingdom, Taiwan, Japan, Tanzania, Rwanda, South Africa, and over 80 other countries having formalized laws surrounding the use of RJ for crime. Notably, New Zealand has been a consistent pioneer in incorporating RJ, particularly in its youth justice system, which has influenced practices globally. In North America, RJ programs have gained traction in many states and provinces, often supported by legislative frameworks that encourage their use.

As RJ continues to gain recognition and support globally, it offers a promising alternative to traditional justice systems, emphasizing healing, accountability, and community cohesion over punishment through fines and incarceration. In doing so, the global RJ movement may ultimately encourage a shift towards more humane and effective ways of addressing harm and achieving true justice. 

Asian Americans on the Corporate Ladder

Shania Kuo and Eleanor Nickel on October 2, 2024

An empty corporate office meeting room, with the empty, white chairs surrounding a table. Photo by Mikhail Nilov from Pexels under Pexels license.

The image of Asian Americans as “model minorities” seems to be ingrained in American culture. Asian Americans are painted as high-achieving minorities who have overcome racial discrimination to reach the same heights as, or even exceed white Americans. This model minority framing, a so-called “positive stereotype,” disguises the discrimination that Asian Americans face within professional employment. How is it that Asian Americans can occupy some of the most desirable jobs but never move up the ranks? The overrepresentation of Asian Americans in fields like tech, law, and business but underrepresentation in leadership positions represents the paradoxical discrimination of the “bamboo ceiling” that Asian Americans continually bump against.

The Limits of Asian American Success

The image of the model minority is double-sided: on the one hand, it upholds Asian Americans as hard-working and model employees; on the other hand, it portrays Asian Americans as meek and subservient. This stereotype, in other words, creates the bamboo ceiling, which is where Asian Americans are perceived as ideal entry-level workers and unable to be creative or assertive in the manner needed for leadership, preventing them from reaching high-ranking positions. 

Navigating the Professional Workplace

In addition to confronting cultural stereotypes that limit their advancement, in spaces that are dominated by white leadership, minoritized people are regularly pressured to “assimilate” or adjust how they display their ethnic and racial identities. Some Asian Americans experience microaggressions or being “othered” in the workplace. These might include “being mistaken for other Asian Americans [or] hearing culturally insensitive comments about ethnic names, food, culture, or language” (Huang 2020).

The Intersections of Gender and Race

However, Asian American workplace discrimination does not only relate to race. Studies interviewing Asian Americans have demonstrated that what Asian Americans navigate is not just racism but how racism interacts with other identities such as gender. For example, some Asian American women receive comments about “looking young”, which influences how seriously they are taken in comparison to their male colleagues. These intersecting identities are not only sources of discrimination, they can be important components of how the workplace shapes Asian American racial and ethnic identities as well.

Some Memorial Day Sociology

jake on May 24, 2024

A military cemetery. Photo by Pixabay under Pexels license.

Memorial Day Shout Out to the Silent Ranks from Sociological Images on Memorial Day and the significance of how the mothers of U.S. service members during the war on terrorism, who, along with other family members, form the “silent ranks” providing crucial homefront support despite the largely gendered expectations and limited recognition they receive.

Shifting Memories and Meanings of Pearl Harbor by Jillian LaBranche writes on how iconic events like Pearl Harbor shape American identity and understanding of current events, with collective memories constructed and evolving through social institutions and contemporary interests.

Indirect Effects of Combat on Veterans’ Health by Allison Nobles on research by Jason Schnittker, looking into the new policy on how Veterans Affairs now lets veterans seek non-VA care to reduce long wait times. Research shows veterans’ poor health is more linked to difficulties in civilian life, social relationships, and smoking than direct combat injuries or PTSD, highlighting the need for comprehensive support.

The Marks of War by Letta Page covers the work of Jason Deitch, a UC-Berkeley PhD and veteran, who collaborated with the California State Library and others on the “War Ink” project, interviewing tattooed veterans to share their stories and emotions through their tattoos, aiming to bridge the gap between veterans and their communities and reduce their isolation.

Campus Protests and Student Activism: Some Sociology Perspectives

jake on April 30, 2024

A college campus with people protesting and holding signs on the entrance steps. Photo by Brett Sayles from Pexels under Pexels license.

This week, pro-Palestinian protests are occurring in many U.S. colleges and universities in response to the conflict in the Gaza Strip and surrounding areas. Students supporting Palestinians are building encampments, occupying buildings, and marching on and off campuses to advocate for a ceasefire, peace, and divestment in Israel’s military. At the same time, other students are reporting continued antisemitic incidents on campuses. As these demonstrations continue and grow, history tells us that increased police presence may lead to more conflict on campuses. In light of these real-time developments, we here at TSP wanted to share a few pieces from us and others on the important role that college campuses and students serve in starting conversations and social change in broader society.

First Hand Faculty Experiences on Campus Issues

  • Mass Movements; Moral Moments by Donna Gabaccia reflects on her first-hand experience as a faculty member during an incident of police abuse in Minneapolis, recalling a distressing scene where a young Black teenager was unjustly detained by police in a library.

Young Adults and Social Structure of Protests

  • When Youth Become Activists by Amber Joy Powell writes up some research on the nationwide youth-led movement advocating for stricter gun control in 2018, demonstrating the significant impact young activists can have using modern tools like social media to enhance their cause.
  • in brief: close to the issue by Parker Muzzerall on how proximity to protests, such as the Occupy Central Movement in Hong Kong, increases support for the movement and shifts political ideologies leftward among nearby residents, despite the disruptions caused.

Challenges of Involving Police

Public Opinion and Tolerance (or lack of) on Campus Protests and Academic Freedom in Sociology

War on Women on the Web

Caroline Garland and S Ericson on April 17, 2024

Two women sitting side-by-side with laptops in front of them, glancing at each other after reading something shocking. Photo by Resume Genius from Upsplash.

Intro and History

Several subcultures exist online dedicated to hating women, collectively known as the “manosphere.” These communities hold different perspectives on how they should operate in society based on their shared belief in the Red Pill, the belief that we live in a “Gynocracy” (a society dominated by women that discriminates against men).

Some of these subcultures focus on trying to “prove” their negative views of women by presenting themselves as scientifically knowledgeable. Others focus on more explicitly bigoted and violent language. “Incels” believe that they are involuntarily celibate thanks to societal injustice. Another manosphere group, “Men Going Their Own Way” (MGTOW), takes a different approach to women and tries to avoid women and female institutions altogether.

Politics and Culture

While many online misogynists solely focus on hating women, others have become more broadly political. For example, many members of the manosphere backed Donald Trump for the US presidency. However, at times, members of the manosphere have come into conflict with other right-wing extremists. Some white nationalists, for instance, believe they should “protect” white women, while manosphere members are often more explicitly hateful towards white women.

Curriculum, Culture Wars, and Sociology in the Classroom

Forrest Lovette and John Purnell on March 28, 2024

A large college lecture hall, with some seats brightly lit and others covered in an ominous shadow. Photo by Pixabay from Pexels under Pexels license.

On November 9th, 2023 the Florida Board of Governors voted to remove “Principles of Sociology” from the list of required courses at all public colleges. Manny Diaz Jr, the state’s education commissioner, wrote on social media that “sociology has been hijacked by left-wing activists.” In response, the president of the American Sociological Association, Joya Misra, released a statement defending the importance of sociology in higher education. The decision in Florida has jolted the sociology community into an identity crisis and led to a broad, far-ranging debate about and defense of the value of the discipline. 

The Value of Sociology

Although the first department of sociology was established in the late 19th century, the discipline remains difficult to define. For those outside of the field, Sociology is often confused with social work or even socialism. But even among sociologists, there have been lasting debates about what constitutes and defines the discipline, its object(s) of study, and its unique way of viewing the world. Even its status as a science is a perennial question: should sociological observations be considered objective facts as in the natural sciences, or will social realities always be subjective and biased? The recent policy changes in Florida’s higher education curriculum have caused sociology insiders and outsiders alike to ask if it’s a science and what sort of utility it has in the real world. 

Anti-intellectualism

Though the attacks on sociology by politicians and policymakers have made headlines recently, lambasting higher education is nothing new in American politics. Since the late 1960s, sociologists and other scholars have been studying anti-intellectualism – holding distrustful and disparaging attitudes towards experts and respected scientists – in the United States. Acclaimed historian Dr. Richard Hoffstadter famously published Anti-Intellectualism in American Life in 1963, which in part argued that the construction of intellectuals as ‘elite’ members of society diminishes their reputation as trustworthy amongst the general public. This framing makes them a target for politicians who claim to ‘represent the people,’ and can transform generally accepted scientific theories into potent political wedge issues. 

The internet’s inception has significantly impacted the form and salience of anti-intellectualism in American society. The racial, social, and economic inequalities that continue to afflict the country have become exceedingly visible through online media. The internet has also provided a platform for creating false and misleading content and its widespread distribution and dissemination. The convoluted flurry of articles, figures, and ‘facts’ uploaded to social media and news websites has given anti-intellectualism a contemporary twist that researchers from all scholarly fields must confront if they haven’t already.

Sociology’s Contributions

Sociology often forces us to confront uncomfortable or inconvenient truths about social life. This makes the social sciences a target for politicians seeking an academic scapegoat or those embroiled in the anti-intellectualism movement. Despite these efforts, sociology remains a discipline of deep theoretical foundations and valuable scholarship in the search for knowledge, shared realities, and truth. One of the major subdisciplines in the field is the Sociology of Knowledge which is concerned with knowledge production in society and how we collectively construct our societies.

While attacks on the discipline have been motivated mainly by political conservatives in the United States, it’s important to note that no one political ideology is promoted by sociology. For example, Ronald Reagan and Michelle Obama were sociology majors. Rather than forcing a specific set of moral or idealistic values on those who study it, sociology empowers people across a range of political persuasions to study, critique, and act upon our complex surroundings. 

Some Black History Month Sociology

jake on February 28, 2024

A Black woman walking on a sidewalk. Photo by Ono Kosuki under Pexels license.

Black History Month was expanded in 1976 upon the historical precedence of “Negro History Week” in 1926 by Carter G. Woodson, the second Black American to receive a Ph.D. from Havard (with the first Black American being W.E.B. Du Bois). In honor of Black History Month, here are a few pieces from The Society Pages and our partners over the last year:

Contexts

Council on Contemporary Families

The Society Pages

Some Valentine’s Day Sociology

jake on February 14, 2024

Two people wearing jeans and white T-shirts holding hands. Photo by cottonbro studios from Pexels under Pexels license.

Here are some recent pieces on love, relationships, dating expectations, and more on Valentine’s Day from us and our partners.

Happy Valentine’s Day to all our new and old readers from TSP!