Skip to main content
Politics

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

8
  • 44
    Yes. Despite the current highest-voted answer, this joke would have worked even before COVID-19, even without any specific current event. The Putin character is arrogating to himself the authority to dispense drinks at someone else's expense. In the joke, the bartender doesn't contradict Putin; "why not" is left to the listener's imagination. (It is widely known that those who oppose Putin often fall out of windows, accidentally consume polonium, etc. Putin's govt is also known for messing with the private sector.) IMHO you could substitute "Stalin" and get a fine 1930s joke. Commented May 2, 2020 at 15:43
  • 8
    The phrase "Next round's on the house!" is comedic in itself for the same reason as the classic "Let's you and him fight." The syntactic "reversal of expectations" is just as important to the success of the joke as is the cynical subtext ("Putin is powerful and arrogant yet also paternal"; "Wimpy wants to see a fight but doesn't want to participate in it"). Commented May 2, 2020 at 15:47
  • 24
    However, the whole point of puttin' Putin into the joke, and the only reason this joke appeared last month, is the Russian government's and personally Putin's response to the crisis, from the financial standpoint, as described in the highest-voted answer. As a Russian myself, I can attest that that's precisely what makes this joke funny to us -- knowing the context. Commented May 2, 2020 at 17:05
  • 7
    I am Russian, so I know exactly what this joke means, there is no other meaning but the third one in this comment: "someone who isn't the owner walks in and says “Drinks on the house!”, then he is not buying for everyone. Rather, he is demanding that someone else (the owner) will buy for everyone" Commented May 3, 2020 at 18:30
  • 5
    @undead10 Yes, of course, the meaning of the joke is in the third one, whether in Russian or in English. The first two are only meant as examples of how the phrase might be used seriously, which is then being twisted into a joke in the third phrase. As for whether this joke applies specifically to the Corona response, as many have said, I'm sure it does, but it also would have worked before Corona too. Commented May 3, 2020 at 19:34