Comment on Im curious what they will come up with

• Liuone@lemmy.world ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I grew up on that show, and I don’t really see what you mean. Maybe because my political views are more or less aligned to theirs. But I get this type of humor is not for everyone, especially if you don’t agree with the message they are trying to send. I don’t enjoy their new stuff but it’s because I mentioned in my previous comment. Real world right now is crazier than any fiction, so you can’t really laugh at the jokes when it’s just the world. it’s more depressing than funny.

  source
• hector@lemmy.today ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I don’t think so, I think that sounds like some criticism from someone that doesn’t have anything real to criticize.

  People like that suck too, like at least be decent to wait to find something with merit to ctiticize, just pushing through some ad hoc criticism anyway is annoying. I mean, how is it sanctimonius of them to critique current events? How is that any more smug than the person criticizing them for being smug for the crime of lampooning current events?

  More than likely the criticizer is a dick rider of someone they are making fun of, without anything real to criticize, but a social media following and perhaps a contract for pr.

  source

  • knightly@pawb.social ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    The long arc of the South Park plot follows Trey and Parker’s political development from bitter, unknown California Republicans with sarcastic, nihilist tendencies to disillusioned Big Hollywood Conservatives with sarcastic, nihilistic tendencies being forced to reckon with the fact that their past attempts at satire have either had no impact or have actually reinforced the perceived social ills they originally set out to mock.

    Al Gore’s reappearance in S22E06 “Time to get Cereal” exemplifies this, even after he is proven to have been right about ManBearPig all along, this later appearance shows him as still being a huge weenie that cares more about being acknowledged as having been right than wanting to actually solve the problem. Having belatedly acknowledged the existential threat, Trey and Parker still can’t bring themselves to issue a call to action, and everything goes back to normal after they kick the can a little further down the road.

    The smug, sanctimonious tone has been a constant throughout, as if they still imagine that the greatest sin is caring about things. They’re so heavy-handed about it that they lampoon this aspect of their own show in Kyle’s “Don’t you see,” and “Y’know, I’ve learned something today” closing monologues. Even when he’s telling a real political truth, like in the banned S16E06 where the text of the monologue is an admission that terrorism works and the subtext is a refusal to acknowledge their own contributions to post-9/11 anti-muslim discrimination, their only advice to the gingers that act as a stand-in representing all minority groups facing irrational discrimination is that they just need to get as violent as the most aggressive extremists so that people will respect them. Which is itself a smug, sanctimonious way of suggesting that they can never be respected as people, only either seen as lesser or feared as an enemy.

    source

    • hector@lemmy.today ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I haven’t seen much new from them. But calling them republican for criticizing al gore belies faullty logic.

      For the crime of contending the campaign was more for personal gain is probably an accurate critique to a large degree. It often is with these aristocrats. Just like Robert Kennedy here, he doesn’t believe this shit, he’s playing them, it’s his thing, they all do it, none of them are authentic.

      I never got the impression they were sanctimonius themselves, simply lampooning, mimicking, satirizing our society would come across like that however if one wasn’t able to make the distinction, because our influencers are. The ones I’ve seen it’s clearly satire, like they are making fun of the characters’ naivety and simpleness as they are in society not themselves moralizing to the audience.

      source

      • SlurpingPus@lemmy.world ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Stone said in 2001, regarding his political views, “I hate conservatives, but I really fucking hate liberals.” When asked about that quote during a 2010 interview, Stone stated: “We don’t want you to come to it thinking, ‘These guys are going to bash liberals,’ … It’s so much more fun for us to rip on liberals only because nobody else does it, and not because we think liberals are worse than Republicans.” In 2006, Stone described himself as libertarian.

        A 2001 Los Angeles Times article described Parker as “not overly political” and quoted him as saying he was “a registered Libertarian”. In 2004, Parker summed up his views with the comment:

        What we’re sick of—and it’s getting even worse—is: you either like Michael Moore or you wanna fuckin’ go overseas and shoot Iraqis. There can’t be a middle ground. Basically, if you think Michael Moore’s full of shit, then you are a super-Christian right-wing whatever. And we’re both just pretty middle-ground guys. We find just as many things to rip on on the left as we do on the right. People on the far left and the far right are the same exact person to us.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • wpb@lemmy.world ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I feel like you’re a bit too emotionally involved. It’s just a cartoon, calm down.

    Anyway, to clarify my comment, which I thought was brief and to the point enough that it was easy to grasp, but apparently not for you: I don’t think there’s anything wrong with covering current events or lampooning stuff. The way south park does this is sanctimonious and smug, to the point where I find it hard to watch.

    source

    • hector@lemmy.today ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      You are doing a Cartman on here, projecting and slandering emotional arguments knowing passing commenters don’t know any better than to take your “side.” Yet your argument doesn’t make any sense, and no number of half-wits agreeing with your half baked emotional slanders changes that. Your argument was without merit, and you have an ulterior motive for it, one you don’t want to share. You are playing the sheep.

      You also use slanders elsewhere don’t you? Accusing the writers of south park to be transphobes without evidence, and everyone watching the show of running cover for them. That forces people to go on the defensive, so that’s a fun one for manipulators. It is harmful to those groups to make false allegations like that though, lessening the value of them when the accusations are real.

      source