The article is actually decently well written good-faith satire meant to address how poverty and hunger are inherent to capitalism as a system. The title was just too bold lol

  • Visstix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    He calls it “not satire” but “provocative”. So he doesn’t mean it, but says it to provoke a reaction… Like satire.

    • mister_flibble@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      This just feels like either

      A. He doesn’t fully get what satire is and assumes it has to be lighthearted or

      B. He’s using “provocative” to basically mean “clickbait, but I’m too pretentious to call it that”

    • Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeh it’s pretty clearly not sincere in voice. Seems like by saying ‘not satire’ they’re trying to avoid people thinking they mean the content of what the article describes isn’t sincerely true, but given how it’s written, it’s hard to conclude the author cheering on from the sidelines. Te nonchalance and unaffected language when discussing a travesty seems pretty clearly to be a device used for effect which frankly is pretty close to what gets called satire.