Posted on 12/14/2016 3:49:37 PM PST by The_Harlequin
I was one of those annoying kids that always asked why. Trust me, I was annoying. I queried anything and everything. Why should I eat my vegetables? How come I had to dress up for certain occasions? Why was it rude to point and stare at people in public? No one ever explained it to me.
I wasn’t trying to be impertinent. It just seemed that life was filled with rules, customs, and standards of behavior about which I had no say. How did these codes of conduct come about? Who created them? Nobody seemed to know. I don’t think I ever voluntarily submitted to a single one.
The threat of punishment was always present, coming from all sectors of society. Non-compliance was never a practical option. So I was always suspicious of any kind of behavior enforcement no matter how many times I was told it was for my own good.
I saw a great incongruity in the adage, “respect your elders.” Clearly an elder came up with that and I was certain that no child was ever consulted. I figured it was just a formal way of saying “shut up and do what you’re told.” As best as I could tell, it was a child’s prime directive—to follow a program of grim mandates, as if Dean Wormer were in charge of the world.
Moving forward to present time, I’m still asking why. And I’m still being told to shut up and do what I’m told. Except now, parents, teachers, playground supervisors, and babysitters have been replaced with an overreaching bureaucracy that performs the same function. Sure, there are laws and regulations that make sense. But it seems more often than not, we’re getting shackled with excessive legislation based more on politically motivated agendas than on workable government.
Between 2001 and 2002 a new and peculiar political faction emerged that spoke to my relentless impulse to question the socio-political status quo. Andrew Sullivan, conservative writer, commentator, and former editor of The New Republic coined a term that became my battle cry for a new political breed. Sullivan called them “South Park Conservatives.”
It was a term used to describe young adults and teenagers who tended to be center-right in their political views as portrayed in the popular animated television program South Park. Though it was never really a conservative movement, it did embrace an anti-Left ethos that young people found particularly appealing. Fiercely anti-liberal and at times anarchic and even vulgar, it was more a reaction against political correctness as expressed by liberals than any kind of conservative ideology. If anything, it had more in common with libertarian-leaning principles than any left or right political philosophy.
South Park co-creator Matt Stone put the definition of South Park Conservative in perhaps its most concise terms: “I hate conservatives but I really fu**ing hate liberals.” Never have so few words come so close to my own sentiments. Of course the comment was tongue-in-cheek hyperbole in the style of most of South Park’s humor—satire with a sliver of cutting edge truth. I got the point.
Fellow co-creator Trey Parker weighed in as well. “We find just as many things to rip on the left as we do on the right.” So do I. Specifically, I’m bothered by those who get hard-wired into their ideology and become inflexible in their thinking. I call them ideological purists. It doesn’t matter what the ideology is. If you have to consult your philosophy before you can make an observation, opinion, evaluation, or decision, you can miss the immediate situation in front of you. Reality doesn’t always conform to ideological precepts.
Sometimes ideological purists turn into ideological zealots. This is the home turf of the fanatic and true believer. Whether it’s a religious zealot, a political radical, or social revolutionary, these are the extremists in society, militant ideologues driven by some grand ideology. Their minds are rigid bulwarks of fixed ideas that are impermeable to change.
Rigid-thinking ideologues make ideal subject matter for South Park mockery. Needless to say, I wholeheartedly approve. Although I don’t quite share the level of animosity expressed by Stone and Parker, I have no problem with skewering ideological purists with all due derision and ridicule. You can’t argue with them. May as well make fun of them.
Although nowadays, the South Park Conservative phenomenon has dwindled to near non-existence, I still embrace the concept. However you choose to label it, I consider myself part of an independent post-liberal counterculture that holds the media in contempt and mercilessly mocks the popular culture. I take heart in the possibility that there are fearless nonconformists, iconoclasts, and political heretics out there that exist in numbers too big to ignore, who might be able to bring down the socio-political status quo a notch or two.
For me, South Park has been a continuous work-around demonstration against the “shut up and do what you’re told” mentality of the Dean Wormers of the world. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go out and buy ten thousand marbles. There’s going to be a slight change in the parade lineup.
Really, everyone hates Liberals. I mean, look at Elizabeth Warren! She sets everyone’s teeth on edge and seems totally oblivious to that fact. Most Liberals are like that to some degree.
Ping! :)
Many peeps just want to be left alone. It’s easier to do in lower population density settings (like in the real South Park).
fair sketch of the libertarian moderate (or “smartest kid in the room”) view.
How did these codes of conduct come about? Who created them? Nobody seemed to know.
&&&
Your parents never bothered to explain the importance of civil society? I am sorry that your parents were idiots or just shirked their duties. Perhaps you are among the unfortunate young people raised by daycare workers.
I think a lot of those SPC’s became a part of the Alt-Right. (you know, the non-white supremacists). I know thats how I feel about it. I consider myself both SPC and ALT-R, so fits me fine.
Happy hour observation: always asking “Why” is a mark of high intelligence.
Team America was Brilliance.
Post-election shows still refer to the candidates as turd or ham sandwich. So Trump has to be one of these according to this show.
It’s not turd or ham sandwich, it’s turd sandwich and big giant douche. Mr. Garrison is Trump (the douche) and Hillary is “Turd Sandwich.”
Well it is your lucky day Chris! I will explain it to you.
Why should I eat my vegetables?
Because they have nutrients that are good for you. Next question?
How come I had to dress up for certain occasions?
Because it shows you have a certain amount of couth.
Why was it rude to point and stare at people in public?
Making people feel uncomfortable or out of place is sign that you are a jerk.
There you go.
I expect the truth is not that you never got an answer but that you, in true liberal fashion, decided that the answer you got did not apply to you because you were so much cooler, smarter and better then anybody else. Especially those that fed you, clothed you and tried to turn you into a civilized human fit to be let out of it's cage.
I am getting the feeling that they failed.
Yikes, tough crowd tonite. No matter. I’m always comforted in the knowledge that total strangers can instantly determine what I’m all about. It’s what makes the internet so awesome.
Your results may vary.
If you wish to be regarded differently then you can re-define yourself.
The power lies with you.
Make your parents proud and learn to fake being a civilized human.
Heck, if I can do it anyone can.
SNL and other satirical shows would be more relevant if they picked on both sides.
We are all hypocrites.
Parker and stone from South Park are equal opportunity offender’s. They piss everyone off. :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.