HUMOUR and POLITICS

By Narayanan Kizhumundayur

Humour is one of the greatest gifts given to humanity. It has the power to bring people together, lighten tense situations, and offer a fresh perspective on life’s absurdities. A well-placed joke can turn a heated debate into a moment of shared laughter, a stressful day into something bearable, and a dull gathering into a memorable one.

But humour, in its purest form, is meant to entertain, not to divide. It should be seen as humour—nothing more, nothing less. Unfortunately, in today’s world, especially in the realm of politics, humour is no longer just humour. It is dissected, debated, and often weaponized, leading to unnecessary outrage and controversy.

History is filled with examples of how humour has been used to reflect society’s truths. Court jesters in medieval times had the freedom to mock even kings, often delivering harsh truths in a way that was acceptable because it was wrapped in humour.

In ancient India, the role of the Vidushaka in royal courts was particularly important. The Vidushaka was more than just a comedian—he was a trusted confidant of the king, whose wit and humour helped defuse tense situations.

In Sanskrit dramas, especially those by Kalidasa, the Vidushaka played the role of both a comic relief and a wise counselor, using humour to highlight flaws in governance and human nature. The Vidushaka’s sharp tongue and playful nature allowed him to say things that others feared to express, making him an essential figure in maintaining balance in the court. This tradition reflects the deep-rooted understanding that humour, when used wisely, can be a powerful tool for truth and diplomacy.

However, as societies have evolved, so has the way humour is perceived. What was once accepted as lighthearted fun is now increasingly analyzed under a political microscope. Every joke today seems to be examined for hidden meanings, political agendas, or offense. A comedian’s harmless remark can be turned into a national controversy overnight, and a satirical cartoon can lead to protests and threats. The increasing politicization of humour is dangerous because it takes away the very essence of what makes humour enjoyable—the ability to laugh freely, without fear or consequence.

The recent case of Kunal Kamra is a perfect example of this. Known for his sharp satire and political humour, Kamra has frequently been at the receiving end of outrage, criticism, and even legal action. His jokes, often aimed at politicians and media figures, have sparked debates about the limits of free speech, the role of comedy in democracy, and the growing intolerance towards dissent. While some see him as a fearless comedian speaking truth to power, others label his humour as offensive and inappropriate. This divide highlights a broader problem—humour is no longer being seen as humour but as a political statement.

This is a stark contrast to how humour was treated in earlier times. One of the finest examples is how India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, embraced humour, even when it was directed at him. Shankar’s Weekly, a popular political satire magazine founded by Keshav Shankar Pillai, regularly published cartoons mocking Nehru and his government. Instead of taking offense, Nehru encouraged it, famously saying, “Don’t spare me, Shankar.”

Nehru believed that humour and satire were essential in a healthy democracy, allowing citizens to critique and laugh at their leaders without fear. This attitude not only endeared Nehru to the public but also demonstrated the maturity required to accept humour in the right spirit.

Unfortunately, such an open-minded approach to satire is rarely seen today.
The issue is not just about Kunal Kamra. It is about a larger pattern where comedians, satirists, and even ordinary people making jokes online are constantly walking on eggshells. Today, humourists must worry about offending sensibilities, facing backlash, or even legal consequences for making people laugh. This is not how humour is supposed to function. It is meant to challenge, yes, but it is also meant to be taken in the spirit it is intended—a source of amusement, a tool to make people think, and sometimes, a harmless way of poking fun at the absurdities of life.

Politicization of humour is harmful because it divides society rather than uniting it. Instead of allowing people to enjoy comedy, it forces them to take sides—whether a joke is funny or offensive becomes a matter of political allegiance rather than personal taste. This kind of atmosphere stifles creativity and discourages open conversation. A joke that might have once simply made people laugh now leads to debates about whether it was appropriate, biased, or politically motivated. The result? A society where humour is no longer spontaneous but carefully measured, where comedians must think twice before making a joke, and where laughter comes with conditions.

One of the greatest losses in this scenario is our collective ability to laugh at ourselves. Cultures that thrive on humour have always encouraged self-deprecating jokes, allowing people to acknowledge their own flaws and laugh about them. But today, taking offense has become a national pastime. Anything and everything can be twisted into an insult or an attack, making humour a dangerous profession. This constant state of outrage is exhausting—not just for comedians but for audiences as well. Instead of enjoying a joke, people now analyze it, looking for hidden agendas or reasons to be offended.

This is not to say that humour should have no boundaries. There is a difference between humour that brings people together and humour that is designed to be hateful. But in the rush to label jokes as offensive, many fail to understand the context and intent behind them. A joke, at the end of the day, is just that—a joke. If people cannot separate humour from serious discourse, society will lose one of its most effective ways of coping with reality.

It is time to return to a world where humour is seen for what it is. Instead of politicizing every joke, we should encourage a culture of lightheartedness and open-mindedness. We should teach people to laugh more and take offense less, to appreciate satire without turning it into a political debate, and to allow comedians the freedom to do what they do best—make us laugh. A world that cannot take a joke is a world that is becoming too rigid, too serious, and too divided. Instead of censoring humour, we should celebrate it, because laughter, after all, is one of the few things that truly unites us all.

• The author is a Kerala-based Accountant and a Freelance Writer in English & Malayalam. Views expressed in this article are author’s own and don’t necessarily reflect KO’s editorial policy.

Follow this link to join our WhatsApp group: Join Now

MONTHLY	Rs 100
YEARLY	Rs 1000
LIFETIME	Rs 10000

CLICK FOR DETAILS