The tendancy to belive that others agree with you?

Satire. It is a great form of comedy. From the Latin "satura" which literally meant 'full dish', satire means to ridicule a vice or a folly by being an extreme example. Or "saturated" example. It can be really funny, in a somewhat horrible and mean-spirited way.

Satire can be difficult to understand. Not just for stupid people, but for anyone. If you think you understand satire and are never fooled, you are wrong because sometimes, it isn't obvious. Sarcasm, by its very nature, is ambiguous; satire is not the only form of comedy. How can you tell when someone is being sarcastic or simply pokin' fun at themselves? This is why there are countless examples of satire being misinterpreted, the target of the satire being wrongly assumed. But then, perhaps the newer analysis is wrong.

Then there is the tendency for those satirized to believe their assailant commiserates with them, rather than disagreeing with them. According to a study from Ohio State University, both liberal and conservative viewers of the Colbert Report believed Colbert was on their side in the domestic cold war called Politics.

From my point of view, it seems obvious that Colbert is anything but conservative he satirizes them so completely. But then, I'm following the pattern predicted by Ohio State, so how can I be sure? However, I'm not sure about Glenn Beck. He could be satire, he could be serious, he could be neither. Until recently, I bucked Ohio's prediction, but now... I'm just not sure. Beck is weird. He could just sort of be there.

Then there is an example from "Men Who Stare at Goats", which actually spurred the line of thinking which engendered this essay. The movie makes fun of hippies pretty completely, but at the same time, seems to promote the very 'hippy wisdom' they make fun of. Is it satire or ridicule? Which would mean that I'm believing the 'wisdom' I saw while the writers thought it dumb. Or is it a different type of humor, which could mean I'm right (but not necessarily).

Even as I think of it, analyze it, I fit into Ohio State's predictions. Which suggests, to me, that I'm not more intelligent than a pattern. That it's not my reasoning that's brought me to a 'correct' conclusion, but rather the one I want. I want to be supported, to have allies.

Perhaps now that this is known to me, I can think more clearly.