Andrew Sullivan, he of the "dream the impossible dream" wing of the Conservative movement (No Andrew, the heart of the conservative movement is not composed of moderating, sensible Buckleyian visionaries. It is composed of theocrats and xenophobic jingoists. A few steps down the evolutionary ladder, to say the least], coined the term South Park Republican. The essence of the species? Here you go, South Park represents a:
brilliant, scatological, hilarious concoction of anti-p.c. Gen X genius
Well my goodness, where have we seen this before. Oh yes. Didn't this used to be called Archie Bunker Conservativism?
Archie was politically incorrect long before it was politically correct to be politically incorrect.
Sigh, one thing about getting old is, you see how little things really change. Some thoughts on the rather constant strain of this "genius" in the Conservative circles of our society below.
First, it is crucial to understand there are two versions, or eras, of the classic television show All in the Family. The first version gives us Archie Unchained, where, even though the other characters, and we in the audience, know Archie is being bigoted, ignorant, "scatological," and that he is a man inwardly defined by his conviction he is pursued by enemies foreign and domestic, real and imagined, nevertheless the episodes of this version give Archie his stage.
Indeed, in the classic and early episode where Archie meets Mike (aka, the Meathead) for the first time, we have the sin qua non of this period, where literally Archie is front and center at the end, and there is no "lesson learned" by this archetype of what we now so leadenly have to suffer through as somehow "refreshing," namely, "being politically incorrect."
Anyway, then there are the much more numerous episodes of the second phase of All in the Family, where the plot resolves around "Archie Is Taught A Lesson." Instead of the relatively free-standing and free-wheeling, if troubled and bumbling, ranting and raving bigot and ignoramous, Archie is shown being brought to heel, as it were, by everyone from the Jeffersons, the Meathead, to Edith, and to what ever Very Special Guest this shark-traduced show by then was trotting out.
But here is the point: Archie was politically incorrect before it was politically correct to be politically incorrect.
And so nothing nis really new.
So what exactly is this "brand of conservatism"?
It is characterized -- and here I am simply going on its own terms, not inventing some "interpretation" -- by the need to mock, to ridicule, to name-call as a primary mode of political expression; the need to be able to dismiss one's opponents prior to any debate by said mockery and ridicule; the need to adopt an initial stance of disdain and contempt as one's primary way of even looking at people not of One's Own True Kind.
Ask not at whome the Dubya smirks; for he smirks at you!
Vulgarity, the triumph of the ill will, the luscious joy of simply throwing a slur at the opponent -- this is the essence of South Parkism. It is the juvenile glee of carving the words "Mrs. Mahoney is a Cunt" on your 6th grade desk.
It is the triumphal rush you get at laughing in the face of someone. At beating up the weak kid.
The South Park wing of the Republican party -- and here, from experience, seems to dwell a fair amount of the attraction of the Young Republican clique -- is that it gives brats license to be self-satisfied bigots and mockers, to say rude and crass things.
This is the difference between Conservativism and Progressivism. On the Left, we call such crudity "comedy," and we have shows and comics who entertain us, but who do not then outline for us the way we would actually carry on our civic lives and conversations.
But on the Right, the need to have an outlet for irreverance is no joke.
It is what they want to say, as it were, in your face.
And whether it is Archie Bunker talking about dumb Polacks, South Park with its many clever subversions of the sacred tediums of American life, or Ann Coulter wheeling out the need to call John Edwards a faggot, nothing much has changed.
For them, it is not an act, it is not a joke, it is not parody, satire, or farce. It is humor that does not want to laugh; it is humor that laughs and applauds because something else is being given permission to speak: bigotry and ignorance.
We laugh at the right sometimes because they are bigots and ignorant; they laugh at us... because they want to laugh at us, to ridicule, to disdain, to dismiss.
To dominate.
There is a laughter which brings low the mighty; and there is laughter that seeks to dominate the perceived enemy or weakling.
I will let it up to you to decide which category Coulter's South Parkism of calling Edwards a faggot falls under.
Maybe I should link to all those comical posters of Jews the Germans used to make....
Have a nice day
TimetoGovern