Posted on 10/28/2019 7:04:41 PM PDT by yesthatjallen
In what he said was an unscripted acceptance speech on Sunday night, comedian Dave Chappelle continued his recent campaign against cancel culture—while openly defying a smoking ban and defending the right to bear arms too.
Chappelle was fêted on Sunday night in Washington, D.C., as this year's recipient of the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor, a lifetime achievement award bestowed annually by the Kennedy Center. Known for his irreverent and boundary-pushing sketch comedy show and standup routines, Chappelle has never shied away from an opportunity to eviscerate political correctness for laughs. Sunday's event was no different, according to media reports.
"It's the best part of the First Amendment to me that I'm able to express myself this way and make a viable living doing it," Chappelle told NPR prior to going on stage Sunday night.
SNIP
Saying that he knows comedians who are "very racist" in their jokes, Chappelle asked everyone listening to please chill.
"Don't get mad at 'em, don't hate on 'em," Chappelle said Sunday. "Man, it's not that serious. The First Amendment is first for a reason. Second Amendment is just in case the first one doesn't work out."
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
Lotsa true in that.
He’s right
Spot on
I wonder what his Freeper screen name is.
He’s got a dry
Delivery, IIRC.
Funny.
Clayton Bigsby
That’s not a bad way to put it.Not a bad way at all.If you follow that thinking it’s easier to understand why Stalin,Mao and Hitler (among others) were big opponents of the 2nd Amendment.And it’s easier to understand why certain cities...and states...oppose the 2nd Amendment as well.
He seems incredibly relaxed in his being. Good on him.
Best thing that ever happened to Dave is someone let Dave Chappell be Dave Chappell
I appreciate Dave Chappell.
The left wants to kill the 1stA.
They should listen to him.
he’d better be careful “They” just might decide to “Bill Cosby” him.
Dave Chappelle, explaining why his parents were unhappy that he didn’t go to college: “The last person in my family who didn’t get a college education was a slave.” LMAO.
Classical republican philosophy has long recognized the critical relationship between personal liberty and the possession of arms by a people ready and willing to use them. Political theorists as dissimilar as Niccolo Machiavelli, Sir Thomas More, James Harrington, Algernon Sidney, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau all shared the view that the possession of arms is vital for resisting tyranny, and that to be disarmed by one's government is tantamount to being enslaved by it. The possession of arms by the people is the ultimate warrant that government governs only with the consent of the governed. As Kates has shown, the Second Amendment is as much a product of this political philosophy as it is of the American experience in the Revolutionary War. Yet our conservative elite has abandoned this aspect of republican theory. Although our conservative pundits recognize and embrace gun owners as allies in other arenas, their battle for gun rights is desultory. The problem here is not a statist utopianism, although goodness knows that liberals are not alone in the confidence they have in the state's ability to solve society's problems. Rather, the problem seems to lie in certain cultural traits shared by our conservative and liberal elites.
One such trait is an abounding faith in the power of the word. The failure of our conservative elite to defend the Second Amendment stems in great measure from an overestimation of the power of the rights set forth in the First Amendment, and a general undervaluation of action. Implicit in calls for the repeal of the Second Amendment is the assumption that our First Amendment rights are sufficient to preserve our liberty. The belief is that liberty can be preserved as long as men freely speak their minds; that there is no tyranny or abuse that can survive being exposed in the press; and that the truth need only be disclosed for the culprits to be shamed. The people will act, and the truth shall set us, and keep us, free.
History is not kind to this belief, tending rather to support the view of Hobbes, Machiavelli, and other republican theorists that only people willing and able to defend themselves can preserve their liberties. While it may be tempting and comforting to believe that the existence of mass electronic communication has forever altered the balance of power between the state and its subjects, the belief has certainly not been tested by time, and what little history there is in the age of mass communication is not especially encouraging. The camera, radio, and press are mere tools and, like guns, can be used for good or ill. Hitler, after all, was a masterful orator, used radio to very good effect, and is well known to have pioneered and exploited the propaganda opportunities afforded by film. And then, of course, there were the Brownshirts, who knew very well how to quell dissent among intellectuals.
Liberals used to virtue signal by claiming to love Lenny Bruce’s humor. (Personally, I don’t think liberals have a sense of humor.) But I think he’d be persecuted even more today than back in his day.
Chappelle is gay...
He knows if you put limits on speech comedy will die.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.