entry #2

Borat and the use of political culture jamming in get-out-the-vote efforts

content warning: brief discussion + depiction of racist images as they appear in borat subsequent moviefilm

Delaure and Fink (2017) use the term culture jamming to refer to tactics utilized in order to critique or subvert mainstream culture, to the extent of ‘jamming’ its usual function. Historically, culture jamming has existed as a set of subcultural practices, often playful and creative, that undermine or point out the shortcomings of dominant culture. These practices have manifested in public and often clever or even artistic acts, including prank and parody. Sometimes this is encapsulated through the media genre of satire, which utilizes the rhetorical or structural forms of a source in order to take a critical lens to that source (Jones, 2012). While we may think of forms such as parody and satire existing on and because of the Internet (due in part to social creation platforms like YouTube allowing for unprecedented global spread of such works) and therefore being relatively novel, they actually have history with previous dominant communication media. Most are familiar with Orson Welles’ radio drama The War of the Worlds, a dramatized news broadcast, or Comedy Central’s The Daily Show, whose anchors often will infiltrate political conferences and rallies in order to cause confusion or make light of political matters. Satire and parody are no strangers to cinema, either, and this is evident through the legacy of Sacha Baron Cohen’s Borat.

As part public-performance art and part mockumentary, 2020’s Borat Subsequent Moviefilm effectively engages in culture jamming through its immersion in mainstream political culture as a means of satirization. Sacha Baron Cohen’s titular character, Borat, is portrayed as a European journalist with a very limited knowledge of American political culture. Thus, in the prank sequences woven throughout the film, he acts as a blank canvas upon which unwitting subjects authentically project their own beliefs and opinions regarding politics, religion, and other topics that comprise mainstream culture.

Baron Cohen’s actions take on the ideals of culture jamming as they are brought out into the public, with the purpose of satirizing participants who believe they are in a real situation when they are actually being pranked. This is most apparent when it is “official” or authoritative settings that are being ‘jammed’; for example, when Borat is faced with the challenge of sneaking into the Conservative Political Action Conference unnoticed, and attempts to ‘blend in’ by donning a white hood and robe. Of course, the audience is aware that Borat is not actually trying to remain under the radar while wearing traditional KKK attire. Rather, it is clear that Baron Cohen is making a pointed commentary on the underlying racial motives of modern conservatives. As cameras follow Borat’s entrance into the convention center, the confusion and discomfort created by his presence is palpable in the expressions of attendees around him. Though to some the demonstration may seem random and nonsensical, it is probable that others at the scene (as well as the audience) understand the implication being made.

In particular, the film tends to focus on the Trump presidency and associated ideologies of nationalism (and even white-supremacy) as powerful cultural phenomena that have transcended the realm of politics, pervading all other aspects of mainstream culture. Through Baron Cohen’s implementation of unscripted pranks, the supposed darker ideologies underlying Trumpism and modern conservatism are exposed. In one particularly striking example from the film, Borat stays in the company of two men who identify as Republicans for multiple days during the COVID-19 pandemic, remaining in-character the entire time. During this time, the audience is able to watch as these men attempt to “teach” Borat about the political workings of the United States. As they unceremoniously describe their extremist beliefs, such as that the Clintons are part of a ring of elites who torture children, it becomes clear to the viewer that the men are not “two of America’s greatest scientists” as Borat claims— but rather Republicans who have been taken in by the extremist and conspiratorial ideologies that have come to be increasingly associated with their party.

The scene culminates at a far-right gun rights rally in Washington, D.C., where Borat takes the stage and performs an original song. To the delight and enthusiasm of attendees (including the two men befriended by Borat, who are also present at the rally), he sings of injecting liberals and scientists with COVID-19 and murdering journalists. As a "liberal" himself, Baron Cohen is performing a pivotal act of culture jamming here— by offering up an ideology that is blatantly, obviously, and offensively problematic, only for it to be accepted and embraced by the crowd. By capturing it on camera, he is solidifying a body of proof demonstrating that the many on the political far-right celebrate these harmful viewpoints. Moreover, he is making a point not only about the callous outlook of the alt-right, but the complicity of the rest of the Republican party in allowing these ideologies to take hold.

Baron Cohen took the stage at a March for Our Rights rally in Washington D.C. in character, and performed a song suggesting the torture and murder of journalists and scientists. In footage of the performance, the crowd can be seen cheering and singing along (including one attendee who was recorded making a Nazi salute).

Despite his mission to expose corruption and inhumanity in others, Baron Cohen’s character is not without its own concerns. For one, Borat has been criticized for its portrayal of Kazakhstan (the character’s home country) and other nations in this region as primitive and impoverished. However, Wallace (2008) argues that Borat’s highly stereotypical background and odd mannerisms meant to caricature eastern Europe are actually strategic tools that serve to draw out the naïveté of the American subjects in the film. For example, the two men who invited Borat into their home probably would not have treated him the way they did if Baron Cohen behaved within the cultural norms of an American man, or even a western European man. Instead, his guise of a primitive and naive foreigner set the tone for the men to explain their ideas very plainly to him, which aids the film by highlighting just how absurd many of these ideas really are and how strongly some people believe them. Still, the dilemma remains over whether this treatment and portrayal of other nations is acceptable, as it certainly pushes the boundaries of political correctness at best, and harmfully caricatures other cultures at worst. Another focus in criticism of Borat is the character’s strong antisemitism. As a Jewish man himself, Baron Cohen defends this portrayal as an instrument of both mockery (of antisemitic sentiment) and education (through displaying the absurdity of antisemitism). Lastly, Delaure and Fink (2017) speak of culture jamming as having anticapitalist and anticonsumerist roots, which raises concerns about the legitimacy of Subsequent Moviefilm as culture jamming and as activism, since it is sponsored and distributed by the highly contentious corporation Amazon.

Osgerby (2004) purports that media images “do not simply ‘reflect’ reality . . . Instead, they actively explain and interpret, deploying visual codes and textual techniques to suggest specific ways of making sense of the world.” Subsequent Moviefilm does both: it reflects reality as a largely unscripted and unsuspecting portrayal of both cultural elites and regular people as subjects, yet it also frames how we look at this reality by placing us in Borat’s mindset with unique preconceptions and goals. The act of culture jamming is integral to this process, both to solidify Borat’s clunky and awkward character, as well as to draw out this reality from participants, including the darker side it is perceived to have. Despite how obviously problematic the character of Borat is, Subsequent Moviefilm has been widely praised for its pointed critique of nationalism and other extremist ideologies that have begun to strongly pervade American political culture as a result of the Trump presidency. In the film, Borat ‘jams’ conservative and far-right culture by immersing himself in its most legitimate outlets (such as journalism and public demonstration) in order to expose darker ideologies that are thought to exist within them. Lalo (2009) writes of Borat’s appeal that it is a challenge to ideologies such as political correctness, yet the subversions of such ideologies implemented in the film are used to critique the dominant culture which rejects political correctness. Additionally, there is a sentiment regarding satirical works such as Borat that they “will ultimately have a therapeutic, healing effect” on the society and culture that is being depicted. This is extremely visible in Subsequent Moviefilm— given its highly political subject matter, its depiction of current government officials such as Vice President Mike Pence and President Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani, and its release just weeks before the general election, it can be reasoned that this film is, among other things, a very well-produced ‘get out the vote’ effort. While it is first and foremost a piece of entertainment media to be consumed, it also makes a social statement by bringing into public focus these unsavory and even harmful ideas that many on the political right hold. By framing the issue as a political one, a solution comes into play, and that solution is to vote. Thus, Baron Cohen’s culture jamming efforts can be viewed as activism with the main goals of drawing attention to problems in modern conservatism, and encouraging increased civic engagement.