Western comedians seem to believe that humiliating people they disagree with might change their minds. Perhaps this is true for the very few who have no belief systems sustaining their opinions. However, a good educator has learned—ideally at the start of their training—that a defensive person does not learn well; if they do learn, that knowledge will be permeated by their defensive thoughts.
This is not merely an idea people came up with to sound nice. Data consistently shows that teaching through humiliation and contrariety is ineffective if the aim is to correct or change someone's perspective on a subject. One might be prone to learn things they simply ignore through humiliation, however slowly and bitterly. Yet, what many "comedians" and other "entertainers" do not understand is that ignorance is the act of ignoring something, not "knowing it wrong."
A person who is ignorant of how to add might learn through shaming and the humiliation of that ignorance. While not the best way to teach, it is a tool some use to that end. However, if someone assumes they already know how to add, they probably will not learn through humiliation. Instead, they will set out to prove they are right.
When discussing simple math or physics, there is little harm in someone setting out to prove others wrong—and many do. A great number of discoveries in the world of science were made when someone, humiliated for being "wrong," set out to prove themselves right. But what happens when "proving oneself right" involves genocide, starvation, the humiliation of others, rallying like-minded people, portraying another culture as despicable, or denying people rights so they will conform to the norm?
People often point to the steps of imperial decline, noting that two industries that grow exponentially during an empire's fall are gastronomy and entertainment. What if the entertainment industry does not grow because the empire is falling, but actually contributes to that fall?
There is a noticeable difference between the comedians of different cultures. Some are successful by making fun of themselves, being silly, and showing people aspects of their own cultures they find funny without being humiliating. There is another set of cultures where comedy is always constructed by showcasing and humiliating others for their cultural or scientific takes. These two types of comedy are widespread in specific regions of the planet. The "us vs. them" type of comedy is significantly more prevalent in cultures where social behavior follows the same patterns: denunciation, the humiliation of others, and the establishment of "moral truths."
Comedians should stop using comedy as a pretext for preaching and stop overestimating their own importance by engaging in such subjects. The nature of comedy—being fun—is incompatible with driving cultural change. It makes it worse; it makes it harder for the educators actually engaged in cultural change.
Comedians should not be allowed to use lies and deception under the guise of being funny; they should, instead, be subject to the same scrutiny as any regular person. "It’s just a joke" should not be a defense, but rather faced as an admission of guilt. If someone says "it’s just a joke," it should mean they knew what they were doing, knew it to be deceptive and harmful, and did it anyway. In my view, that is the definition of a first-degree felony if the underlying conduct is felonious. A first-degree felony represents the highest tier of crimes, defined by severe violence, premeditation, or grave harm. The jokes that merit an "it's just a joke" response are often high-impact, premeditated, and cause grave harm; hence the attempt to use "being a joke" as an excuse.
Comedians of certain cultures and eras refrained from this behavior, providing nuanced performances that hinted at the cultural aspects of a behavior without relying on lies and shame. People comment on the TikToker who thought a certain accusation was "no problem" or a prank was "just a prank." Many of those criticizing them forget that the only problem for these individuals was getting caught, not what they actually did. Every day, people make accusations and harmful pranks, and the fact that they did not end as badly as they could have—had the slightest detail gone wrong—gives them a pass.
Entertainers in general, but especially comedians, should stop thinking so highly of themselves in areas where they do not belong. Education is performed by educators who have learned how to educate. Comedians, often having no training of any kind—even in comedy—frequently appeal to the most demented aspects of the human psyche to elicit a reaction born from these instincts. Making someone laugh is not hard if you are willing to do whatever it takes. Making someone find learning funny, and truly changing minds, is a feat of wisdom that very few people—and even fewer comedians—have ever achieved.
Most comedians I see today are like the famous "debaters" from the West. They have no argument and no knowledge. They base anecdotal arguments on complex words to effectively say nothing of use. Often, they require the same prejudice and ignorance they claim to fight against to be effective.
One last note: Laughing among primates is not a reaction of entertainment, is a reaction to fear. Humans have adapted it during their evolution, and some other primates do it to humans to enlist a positive reaction, but among themselves, primates do not laugh by being entertained, but by being afraid. A good insight to understand what happens when a person finds if funny to be humiliated.