He didn't say his limit is the limit. To argue that he did is bs. If other people operate from the same position he does, then no jokes are off limits and comedians can feel free to explore whatever subject they may, while comedians individually avoid subjects at their own discretion.Mel Brooks can do what he wants.
My criticism of his personal view here is that he doesn't seem to acknowledge that other people might be operating from the same position he is, because he ties his view to such a loaded statement "PC is the death of comedy."
If comedians operate according to your caricature of Mel Brooks' comments, then nobody tells holocaust jokes because they're offensive, and nobody can make a movie about Jesus because Jesus died and that's also offensive.
This seems like a strawman. Are you arguing he wants to tell racist jokes but not jokes about the holocaust?How about...maybe, comedy is evolving. Like it always has and will continue to. And if that means more people are being aware of the historical sensitivities of other groups, what's the big deal? That your racist joke won't be met with the same overwhelming social acceptance it once would have been?