Actually it's pretty likely that the pyramids in Giza are around for precisely the opposite reason he's asserting here. Firstly, there's no evidence that Hebrew slaves built the pyramids. In fact the Biblical 'evidence' for this assertion is massively suspect and unsupported by archaeological evidence. Moses isn't even considered to be a real person anymore, at most he may be an amalgamation of traits from certain leaders well before the time period he is supposed to come from. Moses, the exodus as described in the bible, and the modern assertion that Jewish slaves built the pyramids are all unsupported by fact. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus The bible isn't even clear on which Pharaoh was oppressing them, wouldn't that be something that Moses, who was supposedly raised by him would know? Not to mention the entire culture which was supposedly oppressed by that Pharaoh, they wouldn't remember that either? The idea that slaves built the pyramids actually started with Greek misconceptions upon seeing their enormous size, and that specific claim doesn't even appear in the bible. Sadly, Louis CK's sources for this information boil down to modern myths and soundbites from Charlton Heston. Which would be okay if he didn't present it as fact without looking it up, just look at the comments here already "the ability to point out the things we all know but are either afraid to admit or have never realized we knew." Actually archaeologists have evidence to support that the people who made the pyramids where payed not only with food and lodging, (Which was considered pay in ancient cultures) but also received a salary. Also it's likely that people who owed taxes could work off their tax debt by working on the pyramids, but also received food and lodging for their work. Meaning in fact that building the pyramids was a VERY good job in it's day and age. Even now, can you imagine working off a debt for someone who also pays for your food and lodging while you work? Moses is a myth, and so is the idea the all the greatest things humanity has created has been a product of slavery and suffering. While slavery is a large part of humanities history (and tragically part of our present condition as well), and I appreciate a comedian's performance isn't and shouldn't be bound by accuracy... His ideas here about the building of the pyramids are tragically wrong and could be cleared up with 5-10 minuets reading Wikipedia or a simple google search. (for instance this comes up as the FIRST result for the query "did the jews build the pyramids" http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4191 The question asked now by archaeologists and historians now isn't how the Egyptians built the Pyramids, but how the pyramids built Egypt. It's likely they got created, and created so quickly, for exactly the OPPOSITE reason he's asserting here. Think about it this way, North Korea has one of the largest standing armies in the world. Even the slightest criticism of the Kims leadership gets you and 3 generations of your family sent to labor camps. That's pretty damn indistinguishable from slavery. Yet defense contractors who maintain much smaller populations of employees, paying them well, giving them and their families health insurance, and in general making sure their needs are met... Out perform, by leaps and bounds, the technological advancements made in weapons in North Korea. Not only is this sloppy writing on his part... (I once read any good author reads 10 sentences for every one they writes.) But it's also frustrating because I know this solidifies this tragic myth in the perception of the public, because it's funny and he's popular and entertaining; while actual historians have to work much harder to tear it down with actual facts and empirical evidence... because they're stodgy and boring.
I recently saw this performance and it was pretty funny. He never disappoints imo. The best standup performers have the ability to point out the things we all know but are either afraid to admit or have never realized we knew.
He's actually quite wrong about the pyramids being built by slave labor.
http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4191 Also Foxconn's suicide rate, even during the workers strikes, was lower then what is typical for China... and is also lower then the suicide rates in all 50 states. http://articles.businessinsider.com/2010-05-26/tech/30097107... http://www.economist.com/node/16231588 There are multiple points of error in what he uses to establish his assertion here, and this idea that slavery built everything worth building is a house of cards that tumbles once you look at his errant examples. The man is an entertainer out for a laugh from a crowd, and what he said is riddled with errors and is far from wise or factual. I'm saddened that people think the idea 'slavery built everything worth while' is something people are just afraid to admit, or that they lacked the astute observational skills to realize... It's something he said for a laugh, and it's far from a enlightened historical perspective. Very far.
Oh, I get it, the only reason I would care about this is because I'm one of the people he said we should let die so we don't have to deal with it anymore. Funny! :) No, not only do I not have a nut allergy, but I don't even know anyone who does, even in passing. One of my ex-girlfriends had a metal allergy. For instance if she got the wrong kind of metal belt buckle or if the button on her pants was the wrong kind of metal... it would cause a rash, but it was far from fatal. On that point though, I'm not so convinced as he is that if we stopped worrying about nut allergies they would go away in a generation or two as all the people with nut allergies died. For instance, the medicine used to treat serious nut allergies, EpiPen, Twinject, essentially epinephrine autoinjectors didn't always exist. As a matter of fact for most of human history we didn't even know why exactly anaphylactic shock happened, much less have an emergency treatment for it. To me this directly points to an obvious reality, it's likely just not treating nut allergies would only succeed in making us horrifying and inhuman, and food allergies would still manifest in the next generation. http://genetics.thetech.org/ask/ask224 This source seems to establish that sometimes you have identical twins, one with a peanut allergy and one without.... so while it may be hereditary, not everyone who is going to carry the genes will develop the allergy. It might be a simple as one twin getting diaper rash cream made with penut oil as a baby and the other not... or the mother eating penuts while breast feeding... (If that article is to be believed.) So really I think he's just about wrong for every point of this. Funny as it may actually be, (It got a chuckle out of me as well) it's far from being true or wise. In fact the only way to truly do what he is talking about might be to screen and kill everyone who carries genes for food allergies, regardless if they have the allergy themselves or not. Die Endlösung der foodenfrage if you will. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Solution) Straight up horrifying naziish eugenics which is, in every way, objectively worse then worrying about food allergies. (Which still might not even work)
Yeah, I get all that but I don't think most people would ever consider this "comedy bit" true or wise? I think when we start over analyzing fiction for fact, it takes some of the fun out of it, don't you?
I sorta agree. "The best standup performers have the ability to point out the things we all know but are either afraid to admit or have never realized we knew." The problem I have is that there are a lot of modern myths. Things like 'the jews built the pyramids in Giza' or 'sugar makes you hyper' or 'you need to drink 8 glasses of water a day.' People have been found to believe things more when they hear them more often. http://sitemaker.umich.edu/norbert.schwarz/files/lewandowsky... So I think it's important to point out its factual inaccuracy. More importantly, I think it's fine for him to say it, but also fine for me to point out he's mostly wrong on all accounts. I wouldn't be so quick to discount performances like this as perpetuating these myths. As some of them he got from entertainers himself. For instance I'm pretty sure if Louis CK thinks hard about where he got the idea that ancient Jews built the pyramids it will look something like this...
Thanks for the fact-checking and for the links, I appreciate it. But of course he's out for a laugh, he's a comedian. Anyone that goes to see Louis CK to get their facts or to gather their knowledge of history is an idiot. That said, he's one hell of a performer and I think he does a great job of poking fun at our human condition.