A protest that denigrates everyone, but cannot stand being laughed at

By Bjorn Runa

It took the Flamingos less than twenty-four hours to find their next enemy, concentrating their arsenal of digital attacks on an episode of a weekend comedy show in which one of the sketches poked fun at some of the ridiculous aspects of the protest.

I have no particular interest in defending that comedy show. In fact, for years the programme has not understood its younger audiences, and most of the humour in it belongs to an era that has passed together with the television era. On the other hand, I am not a professional comedy critic and I have no obligation to decide whether this Sunday’s show was beautiful or boring, and above all, the television channel that broadcasts it is private, and if its programmes are no longer entertaining, that is not something that worries me, because in my hand I hold one of the most democratic instruments there is: the remote control.

What is interesting here is the idea that a protest must be protected at all costs from being poked fun at.

In fact, for months now, one of the most repeated words among the Flamingos has been the word “shame,” which has been used as a kind of brand placed first on politicians, then on journalists and various public figures, and for a few days now also on those ordinary people who do not behave the way some protest activists would like them to behave.

It is a very useful word for the Flamingos, precisely because it requires no kind of argument as to when it should be used and against whom. It is enough simply that the person against whom it is used is not one of them. A somewhat strange standard for a movement that has spent the last few weeks claiming it has the right to oppose anyone.

Some of the protest’s most vocal activists have pelted politicians and public figures with eggs and water bottles, considering their acts legitimate forms of exercising political pressure. Paradoxically, as soon as they are poked fun at a little by a television sketch, they all become strangely oversensitive, complaining that they feel offended by it.

Now, humour always depends on a certain willingness to offend. That in fact holds for most art. They work precisely by attacking the sense of grandeur that people often create around themselves, especially when they begin to think that the things they believe in are untouchable. But it seems the Flamingos are sliding day by day towards a political “movement” that has the right to denigrate anyone, while no one is allowed to laugh at it.

So why is “shame” so important as a disciplinary tool for the Flamingos? Perhaps because even after all these months they remain an incoherent group of people who, in other circumstances, could not stand the sight of one another. The only way such a coalition can survive is by keeping the flame of anger burning for as long as possible, and for that it constantly needs new enemies. “Shame” plays precisely the role of a kind of political ‘glue’, since despite the internal hostilities, at least they have some people they can hate together.

What is particularly telling is that some of the strongest reactions come from the same group of 4–5 people, who have distinguished themselves during the protest only by their aggressiveness. Their greatest contribution over these months is a talent for quarrelling and an almost admirable ability to discover new enemies who must be publicly shamed.

Now they apparently have gone so far as to demand editorial control over comedy shows as well.

As people who claim to be fighting the arrogance and abuse of power, the Flamingos are adopting its most negative traits strangely early. And to think that they do not yet hold any power in their hands.