We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Samizdata quote of the day

“We’re reckless arrogant stupid dicks. And the Film Actors Guild are pussies. And Kim Jong Il is an asshole. Pussies don’t like dicks because pussies get fucked by dicks, but dicks also fuck assholes. Assholes who just wanna shit on everything. Pussies may think that they can deal with assholes their way, but the only thing that can fuck an asshole is a dick, with some balls. The problem with dicks is that sometimes they fuck too much, or fuck when it isn’t appropriate, and it takes a pussy to show ’em that. But sometimes pussies get so full of shit that they become assholes themselves. Because pussies are only an inch and a half away from assholes. I don’t know much in this crazy crazy world. But I do know that if you don’t let us fuck this asshole, we’re gonna have our dicks and our pussies all covered in shit”

– said by a member of Team America in the movie of that name. Says Christopher Price, who posted this in a comment here this morning: “Its got one of the best explanations of US foreign policy that I’ve seen in a long time. Kind of like what Condaleezza Rice was saying yesterday, but more succinct.”

32 comments to Samizdata quote of the day

  • Roy Cameron

    Never thought I would grow up and ever see, let alone approve of, such a work of art.

    My God, in that film they even knew how to use everything from mediocre rock music to ironic sexual plot lines to make their point.

    Seeing all those people in the theater with me I also found rather reassuring, and I doubt that the various personages mocked in the film will ever have their crowns restored.

    Roy Cameron

  • sonja smeding

    Fuck U

  • Trey Parker and Matt Stone probably won’t get political speechwriting jobs. Unless Kid Rock runs for office.

  • Um,… yeah, I think I see the point…No, let me go read it again…

  • Robert

    Beautiful man, just beautiful!

    *Wipes away single tear which has rolled halfway down cheek*

  • Tony H

    Is this someone’s idea of humour? Delivered with a knowing smirk, perhaps? Look at me, I’m being smutty and it’s funny… Brings back memories of the 4th form. I do not want to see this film, and I think anyone who finds this acceptable (let alone entertaining) as dialogue is culturally brutalised, if not brain-dead.

  • Robert

    Hehehe, they said “balls,” hehehe.

  • sesquipedalian

    Its one of those where you had to be there I guess 🙂

  • Johnathan

    Reminds one of the fact that Douglas Hurd’s surname rhymes with “turd”.

    Hmm, this sort of humour is an acquired taste. For all that, I am going to see the film, if only for the bit when bits of Paris get torched by mistake.

  • Della

    I saw that film, I was disapointed. Ot wasn’t nearly as funny as the South Park one. That speech was sort of funny the first time they used it in the film, but they used it at least twice with almost the same words.

  • You’re going to get some very interesting google hits after that one.

  • ernest young

    That the quote is even seen as ‘humour’, says a whole lot about the younger generation in the UK. The description of ‘ fourth form humour’, is far too generous, such crudity being more to do with a lack of intellect than anything else…I wonder just what the average IQ is now, – the low 80’s would not be a surprise!..

    Not really surprising that the film bombed in the US, after all the US is a far more civilised place than the UK these days. It is pretty rare to hear swearing during a normal day here, and if you do hear it, it is usually from a teen, or an English tourist!…

    It is not to their credit that the commentariat has seen fit to be so appreciative of such dialogue.

    Don’t bother to tell me what a horrible narrow minded old geezer I am, – that is just the sort of repy I would expect from the ‘yob’ generation…

  • zmollusc

    Isn’t the average IQ going to be 100? Not me, of course.

  • ernest young

    zmollusc,

    Maybe over the whole population, the average will be 100, I was pondering on the IQ of the younger generation, what you might call ‘the lower thirty’…

  • zmollusc

    I thought that may have been the case, but couldn’t resist it.
    🙂

  • Duncan

    Anyone who has watched South Park will know that the genius of it (and Team America) is that though the humor level is fairly base.. to say the least… they hold some of the most scathing and accurate social commentary available through main stream media. Some watch it knowing this… and some don’t… But all get to enjoy for whatever reason and perhaps, just maybe, every once in a while someone who watches purely for the base humor ends up thinking about what’s really being said.

  • Don’t bother to tell me what a horrible narrow minded old geezer I am, – that is just the sort of repy I would expect from the ‘yob’ generation…

    There is a huge depth of satire in this dialogue and in the film. The humour transcends the superficiality of the bad language, but this is all that Earnest and the relentlessly dim Tony H can see. They condemn it because they share the same lack of intelligence and perception as the ‘yob generation’ who laugh only because of the rude words.

    Unable to appreciate the depth and richness of satire and artistry in the dialogue they affect the typical reactionary pose of the intellectually limited bourgeoisie, itself an integral part of the humor.

    In short, Earnest and Tony H, people are laughing at you, not with you.

  • sesquipedalian

    Earnest wrote:

    “That the quote is even seen as ‘humour’, says a whole lot about the younger generation in the UK.”

    Maybe its my low IQ that made me miss something
    but my money says the scriptwriter wasn’t actually from the UK.

    The description of ‘ fourth form humour’, is far too generous, such crudity being more to do with a lack of intellect than anything else…I wonder just what the average IQ is now, – the low 80’s would not be a surprise!..

    Not really surprising that the film bombed in the US, after all the US is a far more civilised place than the UK these days. It is pretty rare to hear swearing during a normal day here, and if you do hear it, it is usually from a teen, or an English tourist!…

    It is not to their credit that the commentariat has seen fit to be so appreciative of such dialogue.

    Don’t bother to tell me what a horrible narrow minded old geezer I am, – that is just the sort of repy I would expect from the ‘yob’ generation…

  • Tony H

    depth and richness of satire and artistry in the dialogue

    Ah, thoughtful input from Mr Coulam. If he’s insulting me, I must surely be doing something right. Given his attempted defence of boring smut, I wonder if by any chance he contributes reviews to the culture pages of The Guardian? Or does he live at home with Mum, wear fawn M&S cardies, and keep a train set in the attic? In either case, he’s not very grown up, and clearly conscious of the fact….

  • Rollo

    I wonder if by any chance he contributes reviews to the culture pages of The Guardian? Or does he live at home with Mum, wear fawn M&S cardies, and keep a train set in the attic? In either case, he’s not very grown up, and clearly conscious of the fact….

    Erm. Probably the most ineffective retort I have ever seen on a bboard.

  • ernest young

    sesquipedalian,

    I know the writer wasn’t English, he was American. He made the commercial decision to write in a fashion that would appeal to the ‘trash’ market in UK. That it is such a success there and not in the US, rather makes the point…

    Paul Coulam,

    Yet another pseudo intellectual defence of the indefensible.

    That was not ‘deep, rich satire and artistic dialogue’, only understandable by smart young ‘intellectuals’ such as yourself.

    It was a crude, display of perverse, foul-mouthed, dirty mindedness, written to appeal to narrow-minded juveniles who just love to provoke their elders, in a misbegotten attempt to prove just how ‘progressive’ they are. Such has always been the case, and I daresay always will be.

    Your pigeon-holing of anyone who dares to disagree with you, as being intellectually limited, and – horror of horrors, – of being bourgeoise, reflects the limit of your cliche ridden and always, mean spirited rhetoric, but then we all knew that, didn’t we?, after all, we have been subjected to your pseudo intellectual rants before…

    Of course it’s fun to poke fun at the grownups, – kids have been doing it for ever, it is humour, – childish humour, and if you are trying to read more into it than that, then it proves just what a fool you really are…

  • Euan Gray

    Ah, thoughtful input from Mr Coulam. If he’s insulting me, I must surely be doing something right.

    Uncharitable people take this as axiomatic.

    Also, what ernest said.

    EG

  • I suspect that as with most of South Park you just have to be there, or at least to know the style well enough to be able to imagine how it was delivered. Which means that those with a lower curse-tolerance will never see the point. But it’s not like it’s a must-see, so no great loss for them.

    I thought it was super. Thanks for asking.

  • The author consciously wrote the film so as to appeal to the far less lucrative UK market? What a novel theory.

    If the reason it did badly in the US was the crude humour, then why did the South Park TV show and movie do so well in the States? Believe me, they both get a lot more offensive than Team America did.

    Paul Coulam’s defense is a bit ludicrous, Team America is not high art by any stretch. Nor though is the use of crudity in a piece of work, even for its own sake, an indication that there is no merit anywhere in that piece of work. Anyway, the fact is that crudity is funny and always has been. Most of the humour in Shakespeare was based around it.

  • ernest young

    ChrisV,

    There is a big difference between gratuitous crudity, as used in the two cartoons, where the humour was in the use of crudity for it’s own sake, and the use of coarse prose in Shakespeare’s writing, where the bawdiness was used, more to ‘set the scene’, than as an end in itself.

    I don’t recall him ever using a string of profanity for either humourous or shock effect…perhaps he was writing for a more sophisticated audience…after all, it was six hundred years ago!

    and the works of Shakespeare, where the coarse

  • ernest young

    oops!, how did that last line get there?…sorry…

  • sesquipedalian

    Earnest,

    I stand enlightened 🙂

    Cheers

  • ernest young

    sesquipedalian,

    You’re welcome!…:-)

    Enlightened enough to get my name right, at least once?

  • Johnathan Pearce

    I agree with Ernest Young. The film may be a hoot and I do want to see it, but the quote at the top of the post is utterly revolting. Not exactly classy satire, is it?

  • Christopher Price

    Team America is crude and it sweary, very sweary in fact. But its significant because its teen slacker humour coming from the right.

    Some reviews suggest the producers are having a pop at either everything or at macho hollywood blockbusters. That doesnt stand up though. The sympathetic, likeable characters are the asertive Americans. The figures of fun are the liberal left. Sean Penn does not come out of Team America well, nor does Susan Sarandon or Tim Robbins. Michael Moore is portrayed as a demented suicide bomber.

    During the US elections one of the producers, i forget which, responded to the Move On campaign, aimed at encouraging the youth vote to go for Kerry, by placing adverts saying “If you dont know what you are talking about, there is no shame in not voting” Its the same spirit you get in Team America.

    In the same way The Aviator marks a change in the way capitalism is portrayed, Team America marks a change in the way liberals are portrayed. If you can stand the language it really is worth a viewing.

  • Well, they’re just words, I can’t see what all the fuss is about. Perhaps it would help if they were paraphrased into something more wholesome. Lets see…

    We’re reckless, arrogant, stupid right wingers. And the Film Actors Guild are lefties. And Kim Jong Il is an evil dictator. The left doesn’t like the right because the right wants to take away all the handouts and spend the money on the military. The left might think it can deal with the evil dictators (by talking to them), but the the only people that can deal with evil dictators is the right (by killing them). The problem with the right is that they can be a bit too quick to act, and sometimes the odd civilian gets killed and it doesn’t look good, and it takes the left to tell them that.

    But sometimes the rhetoric of the left comes a bit close to sympathising with the evil dictators, after all the left also want to control everyone, a bit like evil dictators.

    I don’t know much in this crazy world, but I do know that if we don’t deal with this evil dictator, all kinds of bad things will happen.”

    Hm, it lacks a certain punch.

    I for one am glad that this movie was made, and like Paul Coulham hope that people who go to watch it for the comedy come away with something to think about. I did notice that I was about the only one laughing out loud at the jokes that were at the expense of the Film Actors’ Guild. People expecting the usual Moore-esque anti-American drivel will be disappointed.

  • B00gs

    Ernest (Young?)
    This is my first visit to this website and I’m 40. I can enjoy humor for it’s value. I don’t spend much time on-line, but when a friend sent me this link I decided to check it out. As I scrolled down thru the comments I noticed all of your bashing and low IQ references. In the same comment I noticed your incorrect spelling. Are you so caught up in your self-importance that you believe yourself smarter, or are you just bitter over lost youth? Things that were funny fifteen years ago are old hat now. The new generations are paving the way of our future. Be Nice. I work with highly intelligent children and you’d be amazed at some of the things they find humorous. My senior year of school they finally offered Calculus and I helped my son’s friend with his homework his Freshman year. We’re feeding them information faster and asking them to mature faster, but the human psyche still has to contend with the biological chronologic factor. They’re more advanced, but they’re still kids. Let them have their fun and don’t bash IQ. I’m not

    yob generation

    , but i’m intelligent. So are they. Leave them alone. They may develop an improved version of Depends that you might appreciate some day soon…