Was this show a parody of conservatives/republicans?
Were the creators of this show progressives trying to lampoon the American right?
shareDid you really have to ask that?
share
MovieChat Forums > All in the Family (1971) Discussion > Was this show a parody of conservatives/...
Not really..they were lampooning ignorance and prejudice and narrow mindedness.
And yeah..that was somewhat associated with conservatism and the right. But not exclusively.
Little did we liberals know that liberals would become progressives and echo all the worst parts of conservatism.
Of course.
shareIt was a parody of conservatives AND progressives, really. While the show definitely made a point that Archie was wrong about a lot of things, it also made a point that Mike, a progressive, could be quite a hypocrite and just as bad as Archie was with some of his points.
That's why I love this show--it's a message AGAINST political arguments and tries to drive a point home that people should move PAST politics and focus on humanity.
This show paints Archie in so many shades of gray. On the surface, Archie seems like quite a bigot. If you really examine him, however, you discover that he's more a product of the generation he was from and oftentimes didn't even KNOW why he felt the prejudicial feelings he felt--he was just echoing what he's heard all his life. When you really get to the nit and grit of it: Archie had black friends (the Jeffersons--especially Lionel), a polish son-in-law, a Jewish niece home he loved very much and even catered to her faith despite disliking it and most of all: HE HATED THE KKK. Archie was just ignorant--he didn't know what it was to hate someone for being different. He simply didn't know any better.
One of his favorite celebrities was Sammy Davis Jr and Sammy DEFENDED Archie against a reporter who tried to paint him as a racist
So, the show is definitely parodying conservatives but it's also parodying progressives through Mike. The best example of Mike is in the board game episode where everyone must tell the truth about someone in the room. The episode showed that Mike often treated Lionel better JUST because he was black and would only ever talk about race relations and politics when Lionel was sick of feeling like Mike was putting him on a pedestal.
The show was a work of art and pure genius in how it showed the fallacies of both parties.
I recall one episode that illustrated this point explicitly.
It was a “Rashamon” inspired triple flashback where we see Archie’s and Mike’s differing recollections of a black repairman (equally offensive “black militant” vs. servile “yessuh” boy)
Then we see Edith’s version, the only one demonstrably correct in the end
Yes, I love that one! Quite a funny episode as well. I remember Mike thinking of Archie as nothing but raging in the "flashback" to the point where he was speaking unintelligibly. LOL!
The show did such a great job of showing how, underneath it all, political arguments between two people is a wasted exercise.
A favorite scene from the psychology game episode:
Mike: "What do you want me to talk about, the weather?"
Lionel: "Why not, black people have weather too, you know! We get rained on and everything!"
And quite touching when Lionel tells Edith that no matter how scared his family was when they first moved into the neighborhood, they knew that in Edith, they had one true friend they could always count on.
Indeed. I also love how Lionel stepped up and defended Archie against Mike. He said "He doesn't know any better".
Says a lot when Lionel had to remind Mike to remember who Archie truly is.
It was supposed to but a lot of people supported him.
share Ignorance and bigotry are not right/left issues. There was a time when Republicans were more liberal than Democrats.
Liberalism is a long time movement toward inclusivism. Conservatism is a natural bias for exclusivism. They show in various political parties.
No. Only a very few years before All in the Family, conservatives in Congress passed the Civil Rights Act. Virtually every conservative voted FOR the law, while Dems were only 50/50. Nothing has changed.
Democrats are the bigots with low expectations. Republicans believe everyone is capable of learning and holding a job ... a viewpoint that is being proven day by day with the record good employment numbers for demographic sectors of our population who have sometimes struggled.
Southern Democrats did not vote for the law. Northern Democrats did. The issue is region, not political party.
shareKeep telling yourself that. Southern Republicans voted for it, and not all northern Democrats did. Think about it. I'll bet you can figure it out.
shareYou're wrong.
0 southern republicans voted for it. You must be a southerner.
The House of Representatives:
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%) (four Representatives from Texas, two from Tennessee and Claude Pepper of Florida voted in favor)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
The Senate:
Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%) (John Tower of Texas)
Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#By_region
Anyway, Norman Lear is the creator of "All in the Family" and he's a liberal.
I don't know who wrote the Wikipedia total, but they don't even have the number of Republicans in the Senate correct.
"After the filibuster ended and a number of changes had been made, the bill passed in a 72-18 vote. The bill received 43 of 46 Republican votes, or 93 percent, and 29 of 49 Democratic votes, or 59 percent."
You're missing 13 Republicans, sorry.
I'm not sure what your point about Lear is. I never claimed otherwise ... just that Republicans were WAY ahead of Democrats on Civil Rights.
Yes, I'm a Southern Republican. We fought VERY HARD to change attitudes, and over time, we accomplished that ... just as Republicans did around the country ... helping to get rid of Sundown Laws in the Midwest and West, for example.
"You're missing 13 Republicans, sorry."
Nope, you are. Your quote is from an extremist right-wing website the Daily Signal, not Wikipedia. The Wikipedia states Senate passage as 73–27; Congress 289–126.
Here's a link re: Senate vote for 1964 Civil Rights Act broken down by state, politician and vote. Southerners were the ones who voted against it from BOTH parties. It's a regional issue - not party one. You can examine the vote easily by each state.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/88-1964/s409
Link to vote by Congress:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/88-1964/h128
"Republicans were WAY ahead of Democrats on Civil Rights."
No, as you can see, Northerners have been way ahead of Southerners on Civil Rights. I'm sure next week's Republican convention will have little to no diversity.
It sounds like you're in denial about racism in the South and elsewhere (including the north). Yes, there has been progress, but it still exists. Mass killings in synagogues, churches, and Walmart's as well as a black man pleading for his life for 7:46 minutes. The first step in fixing a problem is recognizing there is a problem.
Moderate Republicans have been fleeing from your party for the past 4 years. Big mistake to welcome extremists like Q-Anon and KKK. Historically, extremism changes the party instead of the other way around.
It seems that you're too dense to read "I'm a Southern Republican. We fought VERY HARD to change attitudes"
If you have to twist what the other person wrote, you're nothing but a dishonest twit.
You have only insults instead of facts. You haven't refuted anything I wrote by presenting any facts. You're in denial.
shareIt was a British comedy show they bought the rights and brought it to America.
share