If the Left Want to Be Truly Inclusive, They Should Add Republicans to Their Long List of Pronouns

There’s a certain irony in a political ideology that preaches inclusivity while routinely excluding, mocking, and dismissing an entire swath of the population. Modern liberal comedy, epitomized by figures like Stephen Colbert, has become a platform for relentless ridicule of conservatives and Republicans, reducing complex individuals to caricatures and fostering division rather than unity. This is not inclusivity—it is indoctrination wrapped in humor, a distortion of reality that prioritizes surface-level narratives while ignoring deeper truths.

The Weaponization of Late-Night Shows

Since Republicans won the U.S. election, liberals have had to pivot their strategies. No longer able to wield lawfare—using the legal system to undermine their opposition—they have turned to cultural tools like late-night shows as their next weapon. This shift, however, isn’t merely a reaction to losing power; it’s also a response to the growing distrust of traditional mainstream media.

For years, the media served as the primary mechanism for reinforcing liberal narratives. In recent times, however, the public has grown increasingly skeptical of its reliability. Scandals, biased reporting, and outright falsehoods have led many to seek alternative sources of information, turning to figures like Joe Rogan and independent platforms for more balanced perspectives. With trust in mainstream news declining, comedy has emerged as a new vehicle for shaping public opinion—its presentation as lighthearted entertainment masking a more calculated agenda.

Figures like Stephen Colbert now lead the charge, weaponizing humor under the guise of innocent late-night television. While the format appears jovial and harmless, it is a strategic form of cultural influence, spreading cynicism and reinforcing ideological conformity just before audiences head off to bed. It’s indoctrination masquerading as comedy.

The “Seen” vs. the “Unseen”

At the heart of this dynamic lies the stark divide between what is visible and amplified versus what remains hidden and unrecognized. Leaders like Donald Trump and Elon Musk often operate in the realm of the unseen, where their actions and methods go unnoticed or unappreciated because they don’t fit conventional narratives or public expectations.

For instance, Sarah Huckabee Sanders highlighted Trump’s decision to visit troops in Iraq on Christmas night—a patriotic and modest gesture that received almost no media attention. This act of solidarity, marked by troops chanting “USA” in unison, was a deeply symbolic moment that transcended politics. Yet, because it didn’t align with the media’s portrayal of Trump, it was largely ignored.

Similarly, Elon Musk’s leadership style embodies this same “unseen” ethos. Unlike many executives who rely on layers of management to address problems, Musk bypasses traditional hierarchies to engage directly with those doing the hands-on work. If there’s a coding issue or an engineering challenge, Musk doesn’t simply delegate through a department manager—he speaks directly to the engineers or coders, working alongside them to find solutions.

This hands-on, modest approach is emblematic of his INTJ personality type, which prioritizes problem-solving and efficiency over public recognition or conformity to social norms. Musk, like Trump, doesn’t go out of his way to showcase these efforts. They are intrinsic to how he operates, yet they remain underreported or misrepresented because they lack the performative aspects that the media favors.

Distorting Reality: The Elon Musk Example

Stephen Colbert’s brand of humor often highlights this tendency to distort reality for comedic effect. A recent example involved Colbert accusing Elon Musk of performing a “dictator’s salute,” suggesting anti-Semitic undertones. This baseless attack completely disregards Musk’s actions and character, while capitalizing on awkward body language to craft an unfounded narrative.

This tactic of selective reporting is not new, and yet another example of this bias comes from January 2024, when Elon Musk visited Auschwitz. During his visit, Musk reflected on the horrors of the Holocaust, saying it was "tragic that humans could do this." Such a visit demonstrates a deeply human moment of empathy and recognition, directly contradicting any claims of anti-Semitic tendencies. The media conveniently ignored this event, as it didn’t fit the narrative they sought to promote.

Musk’s actions, whether visiting Auschwitz or leading innovations in electric vehicles and space exploration, demonstrate a commitment to progress and humanity that contradicts the caricature presented by figures like Colbert.

The Harm of Shallow Narratives

Another irony of Stephen Colbert’s comedy—and that of similar figures like Jimmy Kimmel and Seth Rogen—is how their relevance and careers depend entirely on the same people they criticize. Their brand of comedy exists only because of the narratives they craft by selectively curating information to fit their ideology. This manipulation not only sustains their content but also allows them to profit from mocking the very individuals they owe their success to.

The problem with this approach to comedy and media is its fixation on simplistic narratives at the expense of depth and nuance. When stories like Trump’s visit to the troops or Musk’s genuine efforts are overshadowed by ridicule and distortion, the result is a polarized audience with little understanding of the complexities of leadership, innovation, or patriotism.

For example, when Trump’s inauguration was held indoors, liberal media framed it as a sign of weakness or insecurity, ignoring practical considerations such as weather and comfort. This constant focus on framing events negatively, without addressing the underlying context, fosters cynicism rather than constructive critique.

This approach doesn’t just misrepresent reality—it alienates large portions of the population, discouraging meaningful engagement and understanding. Instead of promoting unity or progress, it deepens divides and fosters resentment.

Apathy Comedy as Indoctrination

Figures like Stephen Colbert position themselves as champions of progress and justice, but their methods often reflect the very dogmatism they claim to oppose. By presenting a curated version of reality, they reinforce ideological conformity rather than encouraging critical thought. This style of humor doesn’t challenge audiences to think more deeply—it comforts them with the familiar, insulating them from alternative perspectives.

The irony is that while Colbert critiques authoritarianism, his humor mirrors its tactics by suppressing complexity and nuance. Instead of inspiring optimism or fostering solutions, it perpetuates cynicism and division.

A New Path Forward

As someone who once embraced similar progressive ideologies, I understand the allure of this worldview. Bands like Rage Against the Machine and Tool shaped my early perceptions, encouraging me to view societal structures with skepticism. Over time, however, I recognized the limitations of this mindset. While critique is necessary, it must be paired with constructive solutions and an openness to nuance.

Stephen Colbert’s comedy, like much of modern liberal media, fails in this regard. It offers laughter but no path forward, criticism without depth, and narratives designed to divide rather than unite. In doing so, it misses the broader picture of resilience, progress, and unity unfolding in America today.

Moving Beyond Cynicism

Ultimately, the challenge lies in moving beyond the shallow narratives perpetuated by apathy comedy. Leaders and innovators like Trump and Elon Musk are complex figures whose actions and contributions deserve to be evaluated with fairness and nuance. Stories of quiet patriotism, like Trump’s visit to the troops, or groundbreaking progress, like Musk’s technological achievements, should not be overshadowed by ridicule or distortion.

To foster a more constructive cultural dialogue, we must reject the hollow foundations of apathy comedy and embrace a more balanced perspective—one that acknowledges flaws but also celebrates resilience, progress, and unity. Only then can America continue to rebuild its identity and move toward a more hopeful future.