Comment Of The Day: “HBO Max Adds A Disclaimer For Morons Onto ‘Blazing Saddles’”

I would not have expected mysterious veteran commenter Extradimensional Cephalopod to be the one to score a Comment of the Day regarding the idiotic and offensive “trigger warning” HBO Max felt it had to append to “Blazing Saddles.” Mel Brooks’ satire (and fart jokes) would not seem to the kind of thing a squid from another plane of existence would be able to appreciate. Shows what I know.

But seriously folks, this is the first ethical analysis of “Blazing Saddles” I’ve ever seen, heard, or imagined. And as usual with EC, it is thoughtful and enlightening.

Here is Extradimensional Cephalopod ‘s Comment of the Day on hate, contempt, and  the post, “HBO Max Adds A Disclaimer For Morons Onto ‘Blazing Saddles’”:

On the one hand, I agree with the people ridiculing the disclaimer. On the other hand, if it gets more people to watch the film and learn to appreciate satire, I’m in favor of a little message at the beginning that says, “It’s okay, you’re not a bad person for watching this film.” I’d like to get to the point where we don’t need the disclaimer, though.

When you mention hate and contempt, it makes me realize that most of what people refer to as “hate” is actually contempt, and that sloppy language prevents them from realizing what they want and what they need to do to get it. People don’t just want to eliminate “hate”—they want to be respected.

The tricky thing about respect is that people can’t simply demand it even if they deserve it. Sheriff Bart knew that, so he just did his job to the best of his ability despite the contempt Rock Ridge had for him, and he earned their respect by saving them and their town.

Obviously, saving people’s lives should not be necessary for earning their respect, but my point is that Bart showed he cared about the people of Rock Ridge and had the courage and competence to help them out and succeed where they despaired. That’s also how he ended up winning over his allies in the film:

He showed compassion to the alcoholic ex-gunfighter Jim and beat him at chess. He spoke with femme fatale singer Lili in her native language and managed to… sweep her off her feet even with her jaded attitude towards men and sex. He offered the brutish brawler Mongo candy and delivered him defeat (in the same action, no less) and released him from jail with no hard feelings.

He’s classy, considerate, cunning, and capable. When did it go out of fashion to be like Sheriff Bart?

It seems like people don’t partake of educational fiction anymore, or don’t learn anything from it, or fail to apply the lessons where they’re needed most.

Granted, it’s quite difficult and costly for people who are in a bad situation and under enormous stress through no fault of their own to show such magnanimity to the world with no guarantee of a reward, and arguably even unfair for them to have to. If we equip them with empathy mindset and a solid competence at something, though, a little can go a long way.

12 thoughts on “Comment Of The Day: “HBO Max Adds A Disclaimer For Morons Onto ‘Blazing Saddles’”

  1. Sort of well-done, EC, but when I think it through I’d have to say not done enough. This is typical though among people who can only approach the edges, and very very superficially.

    Having reviewed some of Mel Brooks films — Blazing Saddles is one and The Producers is another — and I guessed ‘looked at them in a certain way’, I conclude that they are in essence ‘anti-white’. I find them terribly funny in many ways, but overdone, yet the irony and the ressentiment they contain (and communicate) has an aspect and an element that I personally do not like at all. Yet they are, genuinely, artifacts and *texts* that inform the time we are in and they can, and they should, be looked at with a critical eye.

    Kevin MacDonald has written — extensively and I determined fairly — in his Culture of Critique series:

    Individuals who strongly identified as Jews have been the main motivating force behind several highly influential intellectual movements that have simultaneously subjected gentile culture to radical criticism and allowed for the continuity of Jewish identification. Together these movements comprise the intellectual and political left in this century, and they are the direct intellectual ancestors of current leftist intellectual and political movements, particularly postmodernism and multiculturalism.

    It is interesting — though most wilt in the face of the notion — that there has been a Black-Jewish Alliance that now is seen as coming to fruition in our present in a strange revolutionary praxis. This discussion between Tim Kelly and E Michael Jones (Jones has been censored from YouTube BTW so this is only available, for the time-being, on Bitchute) reveals the extent of the ‘alliance’. I found it quite interesting.

    While it has become absurd that Blazing Saddles requires a ‘trigger warning’ and a ‘preamble’, the greater absurdity, in my view, is the degree to which people — you for example! — can only think limitedly and superficially about how things have gotten to this point. That is, your thinking is significantly circumscribed. And yet you come out and make declarative statements about failure to appreciate, or to grasp, satire.

    Let’s open all the forbidden doors! Let us come forward with a level of incisive irony and satire that blows the entire ship out of the water. I’ll go first if you wish! 😂

    • You should know the drill by now: when that happens, WordPress has decided to spam your comment as some kind of a psych experiment or something. Then you email me, I check spam, and 95% of the time I find it, and post it. Easy-Peasy. Don’t be a martyr.

      And the post is up.

      • Interesting. I am a Martyr of the Evil. Most martyrs had served *the good*. But I — I! — work in devilish regions of discomfiting ambiguity. Don’t beat me, please! Please, I deserve to live & breath & walk & chitter-chatter like all the rest!

        Be very careful when one like me extends the Olive Branch! (I think I might be messing up this metaphor).

  2. I wanted to elaborate but my cell phone was just too difficult to compose effectively.

    “People don’t just want to eliminate “hate”—they want to be respected.”

    I actually think people don’t care about eliminating hate. Hate is useful to them as it permits othering the “Bad Thinkers” . I also believe they are confusing respect with control or power. Like hate is not synonymous with contempt, respect has nothing to do with control and power. Respect is an outgrowth of integrity and work. The kind of respect one derives from the power to control is predicated on fear. The gang leader is feared and receives coerced obedience which he or she redefines as respect. To maintain that respect he or she must continually reinforce the subordinate’s thinking through recurring victimizations. True respect is enduring long after the act is done or person has died.

    Language is often bastardized by persons seeking power and control. Kamala Harris stated the Biden was showing “Leadership” when he stated he would initiate a 3 month mask MANDATE or demand governors impose mandatory mask wearing everywhere. Sorry, this is not leadership this is authoritarian control that imposes penalties for failure to comply. Leadership convinces without punishment.

    What is also lost in the language is the differences between hate or contempt for an individual or his or her behavior and hate or contempt of a group. I find looting contemptable and hate it so does that translate into racial animus? Of course not.

    On to respect.

    “The tricky thing about respect is that people can’t simply demand it even if they deserve it.”

    Demanding respect suggests you do not understand what respect is. Respect is conferred when external parties see you as a person not needing external reinforcement. Respect is conferred when others value what you have done in the past. Respect is conferred by the value of the ideas you offer to the group. Respect is a gift freely offered by others to you for what you bring to the group. In short respect is earned not bestowed. Further, respect is not a birthright.

    “Granted, it’s quite difficult and costly for people who are in a bad situation and under enormous stress through no fault of their own to show such magnanimity to the world with no guarantee of a reward, and arguably even unfair for them to have to. If we equip them with empathy mindset and a solid competence at something, though, a little can go a long way.”

    Many people have overcome that difficulty and absorbed the costs of making the best out of a bad situation, shown magnanimity and without guarantees. Without that ability our nation would have been mired in the turmoil associated with third world nations.

    When you used the term empathy it struck a chord in me. Just yesterday, as a biked along the rail trail I was musing whether all those who thought positively about expanding government social programs felt that way out of empathy or avarice. Are people concerned about their fellow man and want to see programs that benefit others or are they only wanting to get their “Fair Share” . I am coming to the conclusion that government is destroying individual empathy through its mandates. The health care insurance mandate was sold on the premise that others without insurance would get health care, yet no where has there been any evidence showing that more previously uninsured people were treated by doctors than before the mandate. Why not? If we all need to buy insurance why should I continue to send contributions to St. Jude, or the clinic.

    Biden stated that it was my patriotic duty toward my fellow citizens to wear a mask. It was my responsibility as a US citizen to do so. Curiously, not everyone is required to be responsible citizens. The same people that demand I wear a mask because I could be an asymptomatic carrier (ie invisible to the naked eye) fight tooth and nail to ensure that photo id’s for voting are not required and considered racist? Doesn’t voter suppression take place if an illegal vote cancels mine out. Doesn’t being a responsible citizen also mean that you take the steps necessary to fully participate in society. More to the point, why does personal empathy not push those who fight against voter ID to help those without photo Id’s get one? If you know that people exist who lack a government validated photo ID would it not be cheaper to help them get one that will also let them open a checking account, get on a plane, among other things rather than spending millions in litigation? Why do I have to prove voter fraud when they don’t have to show these potential voters that would be suppressed by a Id requirement?

    Situations like the above cause me to be less empathetic.

    As for Biden, he lied to me directly. I know his tactics and cannot respect any one who simply employs fear to get their way and is contemptuous of differing but well reasoned ideas. That is not leadership and he will never earn my respect.

    Again, EC thanks for kicking my brain into gear. Great post.

    • That all makes sense to me, except the way I use the word “respect” I would say there’s a certain minimum default level that each person should be treated with, not just for their own benefit but for the benefit of the person showing respect. For one thing, it makes it less likely that people will seek that “respect” in the form of those who promise power or control.

      Regarding voter IDs, it’s always easier to lower standards than to help people meet reasonable standards. We need louder voices in favor of the latter, though. When done right, the voice of reason can make less reasonable ideas sound silly in comparison, while still showing sufficient respect.

      Thanks for the thoughtful and engaging response!

  3. Obviously, saving people’s lives should not be necessary for earning their respect, but my point is that Bart showed he cared about the people of Rock Ridge and had the courage and competence to help them out and succeed where they despaired. That’s also how he ended up winning over his allies in the film:

    He showed compassion to the alcoholic ex-gunfighter Jim and beat him at chess. He spoke with femme fatale singer Lili in her native language and managed to… sweep her off her feet even with her jaded attitude towards men and sex. He offered the brutish brawler Mongo candy and delivered him defeat (in the same action, no less) and released him from jail with no hard feelings.

    He’s classy, considerate, cunning, and capable. When did it go out of fashion to be like Sheriff Bart?

    It seems like people don’t partake of educational fiction anymore, or don’t learn anything from it, or fail to apply the lessons where they’re needed most.

    Good Lord. I cannot imagine a more infantile and superficial reading of a complex text as is Blazing Saddles.

    The movie is quite strictly, and quite obviously, an open attack on native America itself. That is to say, it ridicules and satirizes a whole set of social mores which the Jewish mind notices, fears, and wishes to expose, and control, through ridicule. The movie is part-and-parcel of an entire movement and shift related to the Sixties. It has to be seen in the entirety of the context. Have you no analytical or critical capacities? What is it that produces such superficial view? I am truly baffled by this.

    That sort of critique is part of a larger activity, or movement, or social effort, that in my view has to do with undermining the threatening culture. It can be seen as extending from Frankfurt School activism. I am not making this up. Fromm, Horkheimer, Adorno. Especially perhaps The Authoritarian Personality. That is, the white man par excellence. Identify him and brand him through ridicule and you have made significant steps to undermine him. The undermining is related, or became related and employed by Marxian operatives. This the paterfamilias is critiqued and attacked through sarcasm and satire. Remember: sarcasm comes from Greek words that mean ‘cutting of flesh’. What is said in sarcasm can cut to the bone. Everyone knows this.

    You have to begin to look at and examine how the Anti-Whiteness Movement came into being. It did not just appear — *poof* — yesterday. It was constructed over time. It can be disassembled rationally and analytically. A film — a cultural artifact really — like Blazing Saddles is part of a larger cultural shift, and also part of social engineering. But can you *read* it?

    The movie shows, quite clearly, how the Black man is used by the cleverer Jew. And the “You know, idiots” clip illustrates that perfectly. It is not me saying this, it is Mel Brooks in his narrative demonstrating what he thinks about small-minded America. It is so obviously a Jewish critique. It is not in any sense concealed. Do none of you see this? If not, I am amazed.

    Ridicule is one of the sharpest weapons. It is also one of the most deadly. It was La Rochefoucauld who pointed out in one of his deadly aphorisms that you can so insult a person with ridicule that they cannot ever show you the degree to which they had been affected by your ridicule.

    Femme Fatale singer? She was a parody of the Germanic Beauty and was made ridiculous by the entire skit. But this is my point. Not only is Mel Brooks, with some justification of course, taking a stab at Germanic society which did so much harm to the Jewish position in Europe, his attack is not only directed at a German woman. And this is how the anti-whiteness movement operates. Mel Brooks directed his anger and ressentiment against white women generally. And Jews and Blacks have a similar issue there: they both are attracted to the white woman while they ‘hate’ here at the same time.

    But the shikses, ah, the shikses are something else again […] I am so awed that I am in a state of desire beyond a hard-on. My circumcised little dong is simply shriveled up with veneration. Maybe it’s dread. How do they get so gorgeous, so healthy, so blonde? My contempt for what they believe in is more than neutralized by my adoration of the way they look, the way they move and laugh and speak.

    Do you have any awareness at all, any profound and deep cultural awareness, of what has been done in America in the Postwar?!? Do you have any way to see it, any way to talk about it?!?

    What is interesting is to notice that when in our present time a white woman — let’s take Lana Lokteff as a good example — stands up against the cultural onslaught against ‘whiteness’, that she is turned into an object of hatred and ridicule, and contempt and ridicule: that is to say a Nazi. This is evidence of very powerful social engineering. Can you see it? Do you care to see it?

    If you begin to *see* and to understand the actual and real currents operating in our present, you will be in a position to interpret the present. And if you can interpret the present you can step out of the grip of ‘superficial perception’ and a ‘superficial reading’.

    Why does it fall to me exclusively to point out the obvious?!?

    Please, someone, beat me, hit me! 😳 make me bleed a little.

  4. “The movie is quite strictly, and quite obviously, an open attack on native America itself. That is to say, it ridicules and satirizes a whole set of social mores which the Jewish mind notices, fears, and wishes to expose, and control, through ridicule. ”

    So I suppose, so too is all satire written by a non-white Christians unless only the Jews and blacks are the ones being ridiculed? Is that what you are saying? Can only people with names like mine criticize or parody Germans like Hitler or Bismark? Am I to be prevented from making satirical comments about Rev.’s Jackson, Sharpton or Imam Farakhan because I am not one like them?

    If Mel Brooks were a white Christian of Germanic ethnicity the parody and humor would still be there because there are people out there who are you know “morons”.

    Why did Brooks single out the Irish for discrimination when they townsfolk said we’ll take the niggers, chinks and whops but they draw the line on the Irish. Historically, the Irish in America were treated as a species below black Africans. I must assume it dates back to English rule over Ireland. Here in America, the Irish were allowed to take only the most life endangering jobs. Many worked as boilerman because boilers tended to explode unexpectedly. The frequency of arterial gas embolism among those building Americas underground tunnels and bridge caissons were of little concern to the builders who employed the Irish because they were expendable while others were relegated to constable work. On the Mississippi riverboats, slaves were too expensive to allow to work in the boiler rooms but the Irish were a dime a dozen.

    In his movies History of the World parts 1 & 2 Brooks makes light of Moses by suggesting there were 15 commandments until Moses dropped one which left only 10. His musical numbers on the Inquisition and Nazis on Ice is hilarious. Brooks skewers all sorts of things. Explain Brooks’ Zionist intentions in Space Balls. I guess Pizza the Hut reflects the gluttony of American consumerism and not just a play on a words.

    There is no doubt a certain level of social engineering against whiteness is taking place but seeking to find it (racism) in every human action is exactly the social engineering you seem to object to. The only difference is that when you claim racist intent it is to expose anti-whiteness and not designed to foment anxiety against non-whites. You cannot demand that others not do what you yourself are doing.

    Much of this social engineering originates with people of good will who lack the will or capacity to allow positive social change to occur in a manageable way. Changing minds is evolutionary not revolutionary. Revolution that began in 1917 in Tsarist Russia lasted only as long as the iron hand of government could control the populace. In less than 75 years it crumbled. Social change that is pushed is often met with resistance and that resistance requires those seeking change to demand more and use more force. Ultimately, this culminates in societal warfare.

    Economics accelerates more change than any protest. This was a primary message of Blazing Saddles. The economics of avoiding conflict overcame bias. I can almost guarantee that the institution of slavery would have died out with the advent of the internal combustion engine and the development of labor saving equipment. I would be my life that when fossil fuels are naturally more expensive than alternative forms they too will die out. But, artificially causing the price to rise will foster resentment and resistance to adoption when real economic benefits of competing technologies become apparent. There is a substantial difference between legislation prohibiting discrimination and legislation forcing the outcome of integration. The latter fails to allow people to come to the conclusion that many of their fears are unfounded and subsequently hardens their hearts and minds toward any positive benefits of intgration.

    What I find problematic is that you seem to find seditious intent on the part of Jews and Blacks everywhere and then claim a sort of intellectual superiority over others who do not see the world as myopically as you. Sometimes a joke is just damn funny because it amplifies a behavior that is self defeating and foolish.

    As to your highly edited aside about Shiksas; an entire reading is important.
    Portnoy’s complaint by Philip Roth — excerpt

    “but the shikses, ah, the shikses are something else again. between the smell of damp sawdust and wet wool in the overheated boat house, and the sight of their fresh cold blonde hair spilling out of their kerchiefs and caps, i am ecstatic. amidst these flushed and giggling girls, i lace up my skates with weak, trembling fingers, and then out into the cold and after them i move, down the wooden gangplank on my toes and off onto the ice behind a fluttering covey of them – a nosegay of shikses, a garland of gentile girls. i am so awed i am in a state of desire beyond a hard-on. my circumcised little dong is simply shriveled up with veneration. maybe it’s dread. how do they get so gorgeous, so healthy, so blonde? my contempt for what they believe in is more than neutralized
    by my adoration of the way they look, the way they move and laugh and speak – the lives they must lead behind those goyische curtains! maybe a pride of shikses is more like it – or is it a pride of shkotzim? for these are the girls whose older brothers are the engaged, good-natured, confident, clean, swift, and powerful halfbacks for the collage football teams called northwestern and texas christian and ucla. their fathers are men with white hair and deep voices who never use double negatives, and their mothers the ladies with the kindly smiles and the wonderful manners who say things like, “i do believe, mary, that we sold thirty-five cakes at the bake sale.” “don’t be too late, dear,” they sing out sweetly to their little tulips as they go bouncing off in their bouffant taffeta dresses to the junior prom with boys whose names are right out of the grade-school reader, not aaron and arnold and marvin, but johnny and billy and jimmy and tod. not portnoy and pincus, but smith and jones and brown! these people are the americans, doctor – like henry aldrich and homer, like the great gildersleeve and his nephew LeRoy, like corliss and veronica, like “oogie pringle” who gets to sing beneath jane powell’s window in a date wth judy – these are the people for whom nat “king” cole sings every christmastime, “chestnits roasting on an open fire, jack frost nipping at your nose…” an open fire, in my house? no, no, theirs are the noses whereof he speaks. not his flat black one or my long bumpy one, but those tiny bridgeless wonders whose nostrils point northward automatically at birth. and stay that way for life! these are the children from the coloring books come to life, the children they mean on the signs we pass in union, new jersey, that say CHILDREN AT PLAY and DRIVE CAREFULLY, WE LOVE OUR CHILDREN – these are the girls and boys who live, “next door,” the kids who are always asking for “the jalopy” and getting into “jams” and then out of them again in time for the final commercial – the kids whose neighbors aren’t he silversteins and the landaus, but fibber mcgee and molly, and ozzie and harriet, and ethel and albert, and lorenzo jones and his wife belle, and jack armstrong! jack armstrong, the all-american goy! – and jack as in john, not jack as in jake, like my father… look, we ate our meals with the radio blaring right away through to the dessert, the glow of the yellow station band is the last light i see each night before sleep –

    Important part:

    so don’t tell me we’re just as good as anybody else, don’t tell me we’re americans just like they are. no, no, these blond-haired christians are the legitimate residents and owners of this place, and they can pump any song they want into the streets and no one is going to stop them either. o america! america! it may have been gold in the streets to my grandparents, it may have been a chicken in every pot to my father and mother, but to me, a child whose earliest movie memories are of ann rutherford and alice faye, america is a shikse nestling under your arm whispering love love love love love!”

    Portnoy’s Complaint was written in a different time and era. It is also a fictionalized account of the writer not supported by anything other than his own paranoia and lack of self worth in a time when being culturally Jewish in a predominantly Christian nation made HIM feel left out. The same could be written by a fat white kid attending a predominant black inner city school, a white Christian boy born in South Africa today, a Vietnamese child in Italy, a Christian Arab in Syria or any number of minorities living in culturally different lands.

  5. Chris writes: So I suppose, so too is all satire written by a non-white Christians unless only the Jews and blacks are the ones being ridiculed? Is that what you are saying?

    You are taking an odd tack here.

    We are informed — this is obvious at this point! — by very different and distinct reading backgrounds. Meaning the materials we have read, thought about, digested. I am unsure if you can understand why I try to get to the bottom of ‘what is going on in America and why’. I am not sure if you understand, very well at least, the basic ideas of the Dissident Right. So, I can say that I understand why you might (it seems likely that you do) misunderstand me and thus misinterpret me. You are not the only one. We seem to represent something very threatening, very frightening.

    And yet it has recently been made very very clear that we are not the threat. If there is a threat it is something else. Let us work to discover it and name it . . .

    If you agree with me that Blazing Saddles (the only other Brooks film I have watched is The Producers) is a) a text produced by its time The Sixties, and b) a specific Jewish text about America in the Postwar, then we will have, there at least, some basis for mutual communication. Because this is uncontestable. It is self-evident. Ipso facto and that sort of thing.

    Do you interpret my endeavors as *evil* or *bad*? Most do of course. But I do not see what I do as either evil or bad. And I do not have any ethical issue with developing a Jewish-critical position. A position based in hatred, yes. But that is not my position. In my book it is not *bad* to do so. I admit that it can be problematic though.

    I did not include a quote from Portnoy’s Complaint and intend for it to be global. It was just a quote that was accessible to illustrate the point about fascination. To be attracted to what fascinates, and yet to be resentful of it as well. What I said is really non-controversial.

    I also alluded to a collusion between Jewish activism and Black activism. It developed in the 30s and 40s and became strong in the Sixties. It is real. It is *documented*. It can be interpreted. I have made some of my own interpretations. And I agree with some, not all, of E Michael Jones’ interpretations.

    What I find problematic is that you seem to find seditious intent on the part of Jews and Blacks everywhere and then claim a sort of intellectual superiority over others who do not see the world as myopically as you. Sometimes a joke is just damn funny because it amplifies a behavior that is self defeating and foolish.

    Intellectual superiority? Well that can’t be right because most people in our class, if I can speak in that way, are of similar intelligence. I think I distinguish myself, at this point, on the basis of a wider reading. But that is not superiority. It is simply a wider reading.

    Seditious? Hmmm. I’d not have used that word. It is clear as daylight that Black Americans, to speak generally, have substantial issues about their own being in this place. The way they got here. What that means for them. What their history requires of them. This is not at all contested. I can think of no Black intellectual who is not aware of ‘the Black Experience’ in this sense. It is you-plural who are largely ignorant of it, and them (those writers).

    I do not think that you understand the notion of Jewish Mission. You do, I guess, I hope you grasp in any case, grasp that what Judaism means, and what being Jewish means, is to be part of a mission, don’t you? You understand, don’t you, that Jewishness means never to bend, never to give in. It is an historical mission and one that moves through time. Do you understand this? Jews have an historical will that you really cannot fathom. Do I say this because I hate them, or in this sense hate myself? No! I say it because *you* need to become more aware of what forces and powers move in your world.

    What I spoke about, and I submitted a talk for your consideration, is that in America there has been a Black-Jewish Alliance. And that BLM, in certain senses, is a contrivance of that association. I guess you either accept this or you reject it. In itself it is not a problematic statement. It is not an absolute statement either. It is a ‘facet’ of what is going on in our present.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.