"It points out the flaws in both sides of a position with a nobody-is-safe approach, which means it's not smart or accurate! Things can only be good when they have a strong bias!" -cheapLEY

Nihilists and anyone else who chooses not to take a stand for/against much.

I don't actually like the show. I don't think it's particularly funny. Its 6 days per cartoon thing allows it to be relentlessly current and fresh, but it leaves good jokes to be desired. In much the same way highly improvised films, like those with Will Ferrell and other good improvisers, I also don't find funny. If you have time, write good jokes. That's my opinion. If they were able to spend 2 weeks on an episode and put in some better jokes, I'd probably like South Park. And, frankly, they are able to do so. They just don't.

Now, in terms of pandering to me, we share similar ideas. South Park isn't boringly centrist, as Cheapley seems to think, but pretty much run of the mill Libertarian, which is to say they have a very strong stance. Socially liberal, fiscally conservative. Let everyone do what they want, and criticize those limiting that, plus hypocrites and jerks.

I have never once disagreed with the main idea of a South Park episode, if I've seen it. I've seen maybe 25 episodes over the years, as a few of my friends love the TV show, so I don't have a big sample size. I just happen to agree with everything they seem to say, because we come at it from the same perspective.

One of my friends gives craps on me for this, for saying I'm a Libertarian, or Anarcho-capitalist, or whatever I say I am at that time, or for agreeing with Trey and Matt incessantly, thinking I'm a follower and I first hear someone say an idea, then I agree with it. I'm not.

It's a real perspective. For example, they destroy a Wall Mart for running small businesses out of town. This type of thing is why I don't like Wal Mart. They blame the people for shopping at Wall Mart. That is why I don't really care what Wal Mart does. People have democratically chosen, with their dollars, to shop at Wal Mart, thereby having extra money to spend on other things.

Where someone may see a boring centrist "attack both corporate America and the stooges that allow their success," I see a great example of a nuanced view that a Libertarian may possess, that is, that Wal Mart sucks but the people of the community wanted it to be there so it's actually fine.

That's the political stuff.

The pop-culture stuff, which is non-political, follows the same type of mindset. It's from an outsider's perspective, looking in. Sometimes, like in the Warcraft episode, the idea is clear: griefers are assholes, but get over it because it's just a game. Sometimes, the show looks at two extreme sides as an outsider, and shows how the sides seem to the outsider, then gives the perceived nihilistic perspective. But, I don't think it is nihilistic. They are showing two sides to fixing a perceived problem, and usually how to reconcile those. It's a useful approach, as, outside of the Simpsons, taking two sides of a pop culture issue has almost always been strawman against reasonable person, like All in the Family, where only a particular side of the issue is presented in a real way, and Archie is portrayed as backwards. South Park presents both sides of the issue as straw men, usually, showing how ridiculous each position can get, and treating them fairly.

As most people are outsiders to a lot of the issues raised in the show, or at best slightly knowledgeable about them, it's fun to get a balanced, albeit exaggerated, introduction to the stuff.

I’ve been pretty negative lately, it seems (sorry about that!), so I considered not replying, but I can’t resist in this case.

I refute the idea that South Park’s read on pop-culture is smart or accurate or insightful. It’s usually the sort of cynical “both sides suck” non-comittall stance that feels cheap.

"It points out the flaws in both sides of a position with a nobody-is-safe approach, which means it's not smart or accurate! Things can only be good when they have a strong bias!" -cheapLEY

Is it not possible that there can be stupid people on both sides of an argument? I love South Park for this very reason. Sure, it would be nice for them to pander to me and only mock everything that I disagree with, but wouldn't that be... cheap?

Grizzlei said it better than I did. It's only partly that they make fun of both sides, but more that they make fun of taking a stance at all. That's cynical, lazy, and honestly, in the current climate, dangerous. Advocating for disengaging completely under the guise of "both sides are idiots" is asinine, and I honestly can't stand it. It's much cheaper and intellectually dishonest than making a stand.

I won't say more, as this will tread dangerous close to politics, but in today's situation, I can't tolerate any "both sides" argument, and that's ultimately what South Park advocates.

- No text -