Conservative Cartoon Shows

Post Reply New Topic

Does this belong here or does it belong in a TV thread?

Anyway these have been popping up in recent years and it can't be ignored how terrible they are.

These shows are produced by Daily Wire and PragerU.

The ones aimed at kids are to educate them and keep them from embracing liberal ideologies. And I thought they didn't like children being indoctrinated but it's okay when they themselves are doing it?

Next are the ones aimed at adults in a pathetic attempt at conservative comedy.

First we have Mr. Birchum, a far right version of King of the Hill, but without any heart. Like 2020s Conservatives have any heart. Just hate and unfathomable darkness.

Next we have Chip-Chilla, aka conservative Bluey. It was never originally meant to be a Bluey ripoff but then Daily Wire got a hold of it because they think Bluey is too woke.

Lastly, we have Leo and Layla, two siblings who travel time to experience history from a conservative's perspective and meet historical figures like Christopher Columbus and Ronald Reagan.

What are your thoughts on these awful shows and politically charged entertainment as a whole?

I'll provide video reviews of these shows from animation critics as soon as my shift ends and I get back to my computer. If you want to do that for me in the meantime, go ahead.

And people think Disney cartoons brainwash kids???

Just got wind of this one.
So Fox has decided to greenlight an adult cartoon that pokes fun at Universal Basic Income and the people who live on it.

It's called (oh dear God! *Deep breath*) "Universal Basic Guys"

Someone please put an end to our radically divided political systems!

This cartoon came straight from X formerly Twitter.
I don't like it when shows pander to one side nor the other side nor to me personally. JUST. STOP. PANDERING.

Conservatives watch animated comedies?

I thought though they thought kids would repeat dirty words on those shows, then start drinking, using drugs, and fooooornicaytun!

Most of them are fine with that outcome, so long as the kids end up indoctrinated properly.

Bluey is "woke"?

I know "woke" is another right wing buzzword. But from what I've seen of Bluey I just...don't get it? Maybe it gets heavier later on than I've watched, but from what I saw it is a show about a two daughters with imaginations and a father who likes to be involved in their caretaking and play along with them.

What is "woke" about that? Is it because the father is actually involved in the family? Is it because the titular character is female but also blue and they think she should be pink or something else because she is a girl? Lol. (I mean, it is quite amusing to go in the store and see like the typical pink and blue toothbrushes, but the blue one is Bluey who is a girl.)

If Bluey is offending the right so much, then it must be doing something correct and I will go back and continue to watch it.

I've never had the misfortune of watching any of these conservative cartoons, fortunately.

When the right talks about indoctrination (or anything, really), you must never approach that with any sincerity whatsoever. Having been indoctrinated is the only framework through which many conservative religious people can see through and thus they project it on everything else. Is it because they see that being indoctrinated was actually harmful and thus they want to justify it as something that is happening "on the other side" as well? IDK. Frustrating, nevertheless.

Probably more so than the conservative ones. You can't brainwash people with media they refuse to watch.

If you ask me, some Disney films are propaganda to encourage toxic positivity and make kids politically tame capitalist centrists. Even as a kid, I got off-putting vibes from my Disney fan peers. It indicated to me a certain eagerness to be obedient and acceptable to authority. A certain inability or reluctance to question what they are told.
The acceptable themes and content in Disney films, and youth media in general, are overwhelmingly determined by the right and center. Conservative hatred of queer parents apparently trumps those queer parents' desire to be portrayed as normal and decent. Even today, conservatives have a disproportionate say in what we treat as family-friendly content.
Then once the left started to influence Disney content, we get the small government party going after Disney's corporate privileges for purely cultural reasons.

I hate propaganda, regardless of what agenda it's pushing. Especially if it's trying to pass itself off as entertainment.

Why bother being smart, witty and insightful or having strong characterzation and storytelling, when you can just say the things the target audience already agrees with instead?

I've seen a couple reviews of "Mr. Bircham." It looks dreadful.

I see someone in the comments has already shared Saberspark's review. He smartly compared the title character with Hank Hill, a more nuanced conservative lead in an animated adult comedy show.

A lot of writing these days comes across as propaganda to me. (Much of it from the opposite side as "Mr. Bircham" and these other shows.) This is speculation, but I think the rise of streaming has something to do with it. During the age of network and cable TV, most of these shows had to at least try to entertain a general audience. While it seems streaming shows would rather just get ahold of a particular ideological group and keep them subscribed for more.

The use of the strike marks here is lost on me. I don't know if this means you no longer agree with this post or I'm not sure what, but I'm gonna respond anyway.

In most Disney films, especially the Walt-era films, authority figures are almost always depicted as villains, blowhards or comic buffoons. The only authority figures that are shown reverence are usually animals -- i.e., The Great Prince from "Bambi" or Mufasa from "Lion King." I don't think they're radical anti-establishment, anti-capitalist films by any means, but I have no idea why people would expect that from them.

Eh, I use strike marks kind weirdly sometimes. Here it's more because I feel like it's not a popular opinion more than anything else.
Its not that I expect children's films to reflect left-wing values. I'm just describing Disney as I see it. Its artistic philosophy has always been a little too safe and inoffensive for me to be a huge fan. It sometimes felt like they werent making films for kids so much as they were making films for parents who don't want anything even slightly riské or questionable. At least in a DreamWorks film, for example, I can expect to hear at least a couple curse words and adult jokes
Which isn't to say I don't love any of their movies. Disney has dozens of masterpieces. They're just very. Safe.

^

Ah, I see. I was just worried I was replying to something you meant to cross out or something like that.

I can't pretend I don't know what you're talking about with Disney movies. The safe and comforting element is one the things that appeals to me. Walt himself said he wished he could do a film like "To Kill a Mockingbird," but felt he couldn't due to his image. I don't see that as being pro-authoritarian propaganda, though.

What's funny is, I've had internet arguments with people who believe the exact opposite about Disney films -- that they make children rebellious! I.e., they're horrified that Ariel disobeyed her father and went to the human world! And frequently, the people who say this are "progressives" who believe that Ariel "gave up her voice for a man" despite that she sang an entire musical number about wanting to go to the human world before she knew Eric existed!

Then there was the guy who claimed that the moral of "Frozen" was "run away from your responsibilities," mostly due to "Let It Go." I said that song was in the middle of the story and that wasn't the ultimate lesson, but he claimed that was the lesson people would take from it because it was the hit song. Or the people who were angry at Anna for not "honoring her commitment" to Hans, the man who admitted he never loved her and tried to murder her! I think playing to this kind of thinking is how we got the writing in more recent Disney films, Where. Everything. Is. Very. Spelled. Out.

The thing those conservative shows miss is the comedy bit, like it actually has to be funny to be comedy....not just sad. I imagine they think they are 'owning the liberals' with this when no liberals or left winger are likely to be wasting much time on such a ridiculous show. The way conservatives wasted their time bitching about the live action little mermaid being played by a black woman when how many of those turds were even going to watch it anyways.

Jehovah’s Witnesses have a super cringey cartoon/propaganda series for children they started about ten years ago.

Here’s an anti-gay episode. This one is only 2:22 minutes long. Some episodes are a bit longer.

https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/c ... -marriage/

This episode (13:44) discourages kids from joining an academic club/being friends with nonJWs:

https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/c ... My-Friend/

Does Supermarionation count as a form of animation? Apparently Team America: World Police is conservative.

I remember when it came out, I saw a poster for it at a bus stop. I didn't realise it was a satire. I thought "Why do these guys (I didn't yet realise they were the creators of South Park) think America should police the world?

So a little while later I realised from the tone of the ads that it must be satire. I went to see it.The opening scene seemed to confirm my idea. It's satire. It showed a bunch of incompetent agents blowing up French monuments in a comedic way.

But... then there's the rest of the film. Which says that Hollywood lefties are always wrong and it turns out those incompetent trigger happy agents from before were right all along.

Also, Kim Jong Il has acquired weapons of mass destruction. Is he going to use them himself? No of course not. He's going to give them to a bunch of random middle eastern terrorists for some reason.

This mirrors the Bush idea that Saddam not only has weapons of mass destruction but he wants to give them to Al-Qaeda rather than using them himself even though Saddam and Al-Quida were mortal enemies.

The moral of the movie is that random people want to give away expensive weapons of mass destruction to Al-Qaeda and that any Hollywood lefties who say this idea is stupid are not to be believed.