Thursday, January 8, 2015

Unoffensive

Oggy has been in the antagonistic satire business for a decade. Before starting this blog I was the creator of a little known Zine called NiggerKike You probably haven't heard of it but it was popular among the homeless of Santa Cruz. NiggerKike didn't have a big budget but we poured our hearts into offending all races and religions. I thought it was funny because I was stoned all the time and under the influence of that holy show "South Park". I don't really think for myself because it's easier to let animated cartoon comedies moralize my life for me. People would tell me, "Oggy, if you sound like a pedantic cartoon character on T.V. then chances are good that you're a narrow-minded asshole." I would just smoke more pot, laugh at them and find a way to offend them. Isn't that wicked funny?

The main objective of NiggerKike was to offend niggers and kikes and spics and cracker red necks in the purest sense, for the glory of being offensive. Political agenda never obstructed our objectives. Sure we got death threats but we translated those death threats into our language so instead of "You motherfuckers are going to die.." we read "Draw more cartoons of ignorant niggers." We did not only have cartoon depictions of the Prophet Mohammad, we claimed the magazine was written by the Prophet Mohammad. Isn't that funny? I wish I had copies of the magazine to share with everyone but we were print-only and no evidence remained after our shanty near the river levee was scorched by, depending on who you ask, either the KKK, the CIA, the Jewish Defense Fund, The NAACP or a tweaking meth junkie who thought it was a satanic church. This last scenario was understandable since we had a big sign that said, "Satanic Church of Santa Cruz" in front of the rotting wood plank shanty.

So we lost all the back editions of our zine and the incident caused a critical debate started among the writers, who were now homeless: should we censor ourselves in the face of such obvious hate? For the record, our work was not appreciated by anyone. It was more of a test to see how committed people were to the idea of freedom of speech. See? No one actually liked or enjoyed our Zine, but instead either defended our right to produce offensive trash or criticized our choices and similar battle lines were drawn among the writers. Some said that a recent depiction of Baby Jesus smoking crack under the railroad trestle had gone too far. Other claimed a depiction of Buddha giving Mohammad a blowjob under the carnival boardwalk was puerile, tasteless and without merit. Another said it was the "Jew Stew" recipe in our cuisine section that had pushed someone over the edge. 

I defended the work, "It's our job to offend everyone." and someone asked, "Why?" and my answer was, "To test the limits of tolerance, or something like that. The point is to determine if our desire to offend outweighs someone's desire to censor us." I pointed at the smoldering ruins of our shanty office and continued, "Clearly, we did our job right because we pushed someone to violence. So we win."
"How do we win?"
"Because now we will witness the whole city of Santa Cruz come to our aid and moral defense. True patriots for liberty will support our Jew Stew recipe because it's not the content of the speech, but the idea of being free to offend that's important. That's what George Washington wanted. He wanted Baby Jesus child porn cartoons and Jew Stew recipes! Right?"

There was dead silence but I patted myself on the back because liberty loving patriots always were quick to ask if Mohammed would really have wanted violence in his name, since that is super relevant to the discussion, and now I was turning that around to point out that James Madison and Ben Franklin may not have specifically included Jew Stew references in the Constitution but anyone with eyes could interpret that holy document as encouraging hateful and ignorant and antagonistic stereotyping for my own amusement. Yeah! The important thing, I told my staff, was that we never alter our offensive conduct since we were completely supported philosophically by James Madison, who is inherently superior to all other prophets. It made no difference if common sense and a shred of respect for others would suggest we censor our repulsive and purely inciteful Zine. No, our duty was to tap into our most irritating teenage instincts and channel that into our work. Because that's what adults do. 

I picked up a charred fragment of a hilariously scathing pencil depiction of a polar bear anally raping then President Bush in payback for destroying his habitat.

"This might as well be the Bill of Rights," I said solemnly with the carbonized satire flapping in the smoky wind.

"So, in essence, we are upholding all the moral values of our great patriot fore-fathers by defaming all the religions and holy figures of our time. Sam Adams would've done the exact same thing if he'd smoked as much pot as me and also failed to grow up. As long as the Constitution encourages us to offend people and defends us legally then we must do so. Or else betray Patrick Henry's long legacy of blasphemy." Intentional salacious blasphemy, I added, has resolved uncountable conflicts.

The magazine was never the same after the fire. I felt alone in my belief that freedom of speech, as defined in 1787 by devout Christians, was a decree to offend Christianity and other religions in the modern age. Some easily offended, race-baiting asshole even suggested I was distorting the meaning and intent of the writers of the Constitution to fit my own twisted and infantile agenda. But that's crazy talk.
Creative Commons License
Man in the Van by Oggy Bleacher is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.