China Ban South Park By Michael Ferguson
Talk about proving a point, an episode of the stupid decadent cartoon, South Park, has been banned by China, because China did not like the spin given on Chinese influence in Hollywood. It shows how hypersensitive the Chinese commos are:
“After the "Band in China" episode mocked Hollywood for shaping its content to please the Chinese government, Beijing has responded by deleting all clips, episodes and discussions of the Comedy Central show. South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone probably saw this coming, and to their credit, simply didn't care. The most recent episode of South Park, "Band in China," has been generating loads of media attention for its sharp critique of the way Hollywood tends to shape its content to avoid offending Chinese government censors in any way whatsoever. Now, those very same government censors, in the real world, have lashed back at South Park by deleting virtually every clip, episode and online discussion of the show from Chinese streaming services, social media and even fan pages. A cursory perusal through China's highly regulated internet landscape shows the animated series conspicuously absent everywhere it recently had a presence. A search of the Twitter-like social media service Weibo turns up not a single mention of South Park among the billions of past posts. On streaming service Youku, owned by internet giant Alibaba, all links to clips, episodes and even full seasons of the show are now dead.”
So much for China being the cultural leader of the world; harvesting organs is one thing, but banning a dopey cartoon is just over the top and down the other side! And, speaking of Hollywood, here is one opinion:
“China, like Cuba, is a massive prison, a giant concentration camp, and Hollywood does not care because Hollywood is, above all, insatiably greedy. If Hollywood wants access to China’s massive movie-going public, to thousands and thousands of movie screens, China forces Hollywood to toe the line, lick its boots, censor itself, and — worst of all — depict the Chinese government as heroic and noble, which is no different than depicting the Nazis as heroic and noble. And we are not just talking about the movies Hollywood wants to distribute in China. You remember that Red Dawn remake I was just talking about? It never left the county. Red Dawn wasn’t censored and twisted into something laughable because Hollywood wanted to distribute it in China. Even though there was no foreign distribution whatsoever; even though it was produced for American consumption only, it was still censored so it wouldn’t offend the Chinese government.
So not only do the Chinese have control over the content of our movies, that control also extends to television and the news media. These massive, multinational companies don’t allow their TV shows or news outlets to expose or criticize China’s human rights abuses out of the fear China will retaliate against its film product. Listen, you cannot even begin to count how this censorship damages our movies and television shows because most of that censorship is what we don’t see, which is anything things that might offend China’s merciless censors. Didn’t you find it odd how the 30th anniversary of Tiananmen Square was almost completely ignored? Where was the big, Oscar bait movie? In a moral world, that would be in theaters right now. Those of you wondering why movies have become so bland and sexless should know that it’s not just the Woketards removing all the sexy fun from the big and small screen, it is also a prudish Chinese government. Unlike the Woketards, though, China has actual leverage, financial leverage, which is all Hollywood cares about. If China wanted every movie to be as sexually provocative as Basic Instinct, that’s what would happen.”
Maybe it is not all bad since Hollywood has been dead set against nationalist and traditionalist ideals, going the way of cosmopolitanism, and we have seen from the racial censoring of the Black Star Wars character, that the Chinese government is not big on Hollywood’s diversity agenda. Hopefully, the need to court China will dilute the attack made upon traditionalists. Thus, I doubt very much that a transgendered superhero will do well in the Chinese market. Is prudishness so bad?
A good commentary on the Chinese display of intolerance has been made by Brett Stevens as Amerika.org:
“When Socrates wanted to prove that democracy was hypocritical, he asked questions and democracy murdered him (we should never forgive it, and never forget). Like most brave people, he knew that the chances were good that they would destroy him, but in doing so, he would prove his point and establish that reality exists independent of human desires. Numerous literary figures have been based on Socrates: Obi-Wan Kenobi, Jesus Christ, Dumbledore. The antithesis, the person who demands his own desires be more important than consequences, also exists: Captain Ahab, “Bud” from Repo Man, Martin Luther King Jr. In this case, the South Park team combined the two: they criticized Chinese influence in Hollywood, knowing that China would ban the show and confirm its intentions, while simultaneously cementing their role in resistance to the growing herd takeover of the West. China acted predictably, revealing their hand. This follows the Trump method of provoking the opposition into doing whatever shows that they were not doing what they said they were. He has revealed, for example, that the Left is more power-hungry than concerned about “helping people.” In the meantime, China shows itself to have the same pathology as the Left: a desire for power, concealed behind pleasant-sounding things like altruism, equality, and opportunity.”