Last September, South Park creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker suggested they were done with Donald Trump. “I don’t know what more we could possibly say about Trump.” Stone told Vanity Fair, “We’ve tried to do South Park through four or five presidential elections, and it is such a hard thing to—it’s such a mind scramble, and it seems like it takes outsized importance.”
“Obviously, it’s fucking important, but it kind of takes over everything and we just have less fun.” Parker said. “I don’t know what more we could possibly say about Trump.”
That was apparently the set-up for a punchline South Park delivered last week in its 27th season premiere episode, which depicted Trump as Satan’s squeeze with small genitalia. (To his credit, Satan isn’t a size queen.) This obviously pissed off MAGA’s mad king, and I fully support anything that raises the blood pressure of someone who lives on Big Macs and Filet-o-Fish sandwiches.
White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers actually issued a statement condemning a cable TV series: “This show hasn’t been relevant for over 20 years and is hanging on by a thread with uninspired ideas in a desperate attempt for attention. President Trump has delivered on more promises in just six months than any other president in our country’s history — and no fourth-rate show can derail President Trump’s hot streak.”
South Park’s audience isn’t quite the same as those who watch The Daily Show or The Late Show. Former Republican House Rep. Joe Walsh, now a Democrat, told MSNBC, “Remember, a lot of Trump’s base, they’re not Republicans. They’re just men — they’re guys who typically don’t belong to a party, they don’t vote all the time, and they watch South Park.”
Indeed, Joe Rogan — who endorsed Trump last year — said the recent South Park episode was “hilarious.” This is like the school bully’s buddies suddenly laughing at him.
Rogers ranted in his North-Korean style statement, “The Left’s hypocrisy truly has no end — for years they have come after South Park for what they labeled as ‘offense’ [sic] content, but suddenly they are praising the show. Just like the creators of South Park, the Left has no authentic or original content, which is why their popularity continues to hit record lows.”
Interestingly, I’ve only seen grudging support from some liberals regarding the South Park Trump episode. They like that Trump is offended, but less humorous liberals would reflexively consider how he was skewered either homophobic — “Why is it funny that a man is in bed with another man who happens to be Satan? Check your privilege.” — or ableist — “Trump probably doesn’t see you laughing at the image of his small penis with eyeballs on it, but you know who does? People with small penises with eyeballs on them. Do better.”
Wait, South Park gave us Trump? Really.
Someone named “Eb” posted on social media, “NGL, South Park telling kids for nearly 30 years that apathy is cool and caring is embarrassing is part of how we got here. Not gonna fawn over a stopped clock inevitably being slightly right about something. Yes, coalitions, but not giving harmful shit passes just because someone made you laugh.”
Back in the late 1990s, I worked with a young woman who loved South Park. I personally never watched the show, but I enjoyed her Cartman impression during slow moments at work. A favorite line of hers: “What kind of side dishes will we be enjoying this evening with our frozen waffles? Am I to understand there will be no side dishes?” (Watch below.)
My friend’s now a 50something schoolteacher, and she definitely doesn’t think “apathy is cool and caring is embarrassing.” At its peak, South Park had an audience of about 6 million viewers — hardly enough people to support claims that the show brainwashed a generation of young people. In fact, Seinfeld, Friends, and Will & Grace , which all had significantly larger audiences, usually avoided any 1980s-era sitcom sentiment. There were no “special episodes” where Monica confronts an eating disorder or Joey calls out a racist relative. Anything that’s too serious is played for laughs.
However, the young kids who first watched South Park in the 1990s were the ones who helped elect Barack Obama — twice — on a platform of hope and change, not apathy and cynicism.
Liberals are inclined to blame any perceived shift away from Democrats post-Obama on racism or sexism. However, Obama was perhaps the first modern Democratic candidate that supporters regarded with awe. This continued with Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris. Their more devout supporters online can demonstrate a perhaps unhealthy parasocial relationship with a politician. Even liberals who liked Bill Clinton made fun of his womanizing and his overall shaky grasp on the truth. No one suggested that Darrell Hammond’s Clinton impression on Saturday Night Live was going to help Bob Dole win in 1996 and thus destroy the nation. (Watch below.)
Yet, many liberals online would chafe at any “Biden is old” jokes or SNL cold opens that mocked Harris’s less-than-convincing arguments that Biden was still at the top of his game. (Watch below.)
Andrew Sullivan came up with the term “South Park Republicans” in 2001. “No PC shibboleths are left unmolested,” he wrote in 2003. “From the handicapped kid, Timmy, to the black kid, Token, every stereotype enjoys itself. The idiocy of hate-crime laws, the fawning condescension of well-meaning liberal adults, the dumbness of Hollywood celebrity, the surrealism of sexual harassment legislation: the targets are brutally assaulted for an enthusiastic audience of those between 18 and 39.”
I’d argue this is consistent with anti-establishment views — free speech absolutism and distrust of institutions, etc. It’s classic Saturday Night Live and the original Not Ready For Primetime Players. Parker and Stone aren’t exactly novel in this manner. They are critical of both major political parties and enjoy targeting perceived sacred cows, regardless of ideology. This can sometimes seem like willful contrarianism, such as their attacks on climate change science, but they’ve also sent up religious fundamentalism. The South Park “mock everything” approach can seem juvenile, though, especially in serious times.
Oscar Wilde argued strongly in the preface for The Picture of Dorian Gray that art is not “moral.” It’s either good art or bad art. The contention that art should serve a positive social purpose can veer dangerously close to propaganda. When you suggest that a random TV show had a negative moral impact on children, you sound like a stuffy PTA parent from any number of 1980s movies. The poor, abused term “woke” has been co-opted by the right as a slur, but the left has turned it into their form of a social conservatism. Prudes protested Lenny Bruce and Richard Pryor on “moral” grounds and would likely “cancel” them today. (I remember when Prince and The Simpsons were popular targets from moral scolds.)
Perhaps what’s changed in the past 20 years is that Republicans have seemingly embraced “anti-establishment” rhetoric (but only superficially) while Democrats have become perceived as the “hall monitor” party. There are complaints that the Democrats are collectively painted and treated as a “feminine” party and Republicans are the “cool” dads. I don’t necessarily agree with that gendered view, as it suggests that women are innately part of the “establishment” and men are inherently “mavericks.” That’s not true, and besides, you’ll never make young people think the “establishment” is cool.
Trump and Republicans have proven that their “anti-establishment” stance was garbage. They are ideological censors who want to crush any thought that doesn’t conform with their own limited views. They are John Lithgow from Footloose but on Jeffrey Epstein’s island. That’s why there were never any South Park Republicans, just useful idiots for Republicans who happened to watch South Park.
South Park is a show I can't watch these days, what with the house on fire and all. But Parker and Stone have remained pretty loyal to their shine-a-light/ nothing is off limits for decades more than anyone-including them- thought they ever would. The Scientology stuff comes to mind. Like it, hate it, it's certainly art.
“This show has no relevance”, says the White House flunky, who by commenting publicly on it is proving that the show is in fact relevant.
South Park always struck me as a show that went where the jokes took them, mining humor without sacrificing it for a message. Sure, the creators were somewhat libertarian but I think they cared more about getting laughs than getting a message across. And that’s why their fans span the political spectrum.
And this attack on Trump is brilliant considering Paramount just insanely paid over a billion dollars for the show (!!!). They’re doing everything possible to get backlash from Trump right after he forced the company to get CBS (which it owns) to dump Stephen Colbert for much tamer anti-Trump humor. Now either Trump has to prove his impotence by letting Paramount’s merger go through or he has to make that Quisling company dump a property they paid through the nose for. A big “fuck you” to the most deserving people.