fbpx
Politics Foreign Affairs Culture Fellows Program

Why Does Disney Hate So Many Of Its Customers?

'Proud Family' reboot pushes radical CRT agenda. One reader, sick of the propaganda, texts to say he cancelled Disney+
Screen Shot 2023-02-13 at 11.37.16 PM

Friend and reader just texted to say that he canceled Disney Plus. Said he couldn't stand the anti-white propaganda on "Proud Family," and the producer admitting that she queered the show. Queered the show? I had forgotten about this:

A Disney executive producer admitted she has been pushing a “not-at-all-secret gay agenda” for children’s animation, even as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law this week.

During a Disney staff meeting about the law — which bars Florida teachers from discussing topics like sexual orientation or gender identity with students unless they’re in the fourth grade or higher — executive producer for Disney Television Animation Latoya Raveneau touted Disney’s efforts to feature LGBTQ storylines.

“In my little pocket of Proud Family Disney TVA, the showrunners were super welcoming . . . to my not-at-all-secret gay agenda,” Raveneau said in a leaked video obtained by journalist Christopher Rufo. “Maybe it was that way in the past, but I guess something must have happened . . . and then like all that momentum that I felt, that sense of ‘I don’t have to be afraid to have these two characters kiss in the background.’”

Advertisement

I cannot stand Disney, so I haven't been paying attention to its content. I see what they mean about the "Proud Family" anti-whiteness. Look:

And:

Turns out some white people don't like being told over and over and over again that they are the fu*king a*sholes of the world, and paying cable fees for it. This bothers Nicole Hannah-Jones, who says such wypipo are in denial about being RACIST:

Advertisement

Oh, please -- as if rejecting a particular take on the history of slavery is the same thing as not wanting to talk about slavery. NHJ wants the voices of radicals like her to be the only ones allowed to speak, or to hold an opinion at all. The "amazing clip" features black characters presenting a particularly sharp ideological view of history:

“We had Tubman, Turner, Frederick D. Then they say Lincoln freed the slaves, but slaves were men and women and only we can free ourselves. Emancipation is not freedom,” the characters sang. “Jim Crow, segregation, redlining, public schools feeding private prisons where we become slaves again.”

Yes, because the only reason any black person goes to prison in contemporary America is because white people want to enslave them. Lord. The characters in the clip chant over and over again, "Slaves built this country!" Well, yes, slaves built some of this country. But it's a big country. Most of it was not slave territory. White people from the North fought a war to free the slaves and preserve the Union. Nearly 600,000 white men from the North were killed, wounded, captured, or went missing in that epic fight. Their sacrifice, their memory, should not be erased.

The girls on the clip sing:

“We’ll take the 40 acres, keep the mule,” they sang. “We made your families rich — from the southern plantation heirs to the northern bankers to the New England ship owners, the founding fathers, former presidents, current senators…”

Yes, of course a lot of people got rich from slavery, and not just Southerners. But the purpose of this clip is not to enlarge and increase historical understanding. It's political agitprop designed to inflame and enrage, and to drive division, envy, and racial conflict.

If that's what you want in children's entertainment, fine, Disney Plus has you covered. But if you don't want racialized spite as entertainment, you do what my friend did, and cancel Disney Plus. Disney Plus's attitude towards much of its audience reminds me of this old cartoon from SPY magazine. "Will you subscribe to our channel so we can keep producing quality animated entertainment?":

Comments

Want to join the conversation?

Subscribe for as little as $5/mo to start commenting on Rod’s blog.

Join Now
Fran Macadam
Fran Macadam
A whole lot of "white" people were badly hurt, directly and indirectly, by the financial predations of greedy slaveowners. White folks in general didn't benefit from the predatory slaveowners. Those aristocratic people were all about themselves. One might as well argue about punishing average folks of Jewish ethnicity just because Madoff was a Wall Street scoundrel.

All this crap is about what those rats did, who are now beyond human justice. Why fight a proxy war against people who were never there and did nothing wrong?

I might as well as put in for full restoration of lands to my indigenous relatives, or nothing!
schedule 1 year ago
Theodore Iacobuzio
Theodore Iacobuzio
"I cannot stand Disney..."

Stout fellow. The late Don Imus used to say that people who took their kids to Disney parks should have their kids taken away from them. Watch the closing sequence of "Fantasia" (the Pastoral) and tell me there wasn't something deeply wrong with the whole enterprise from the beginning. On the other hand some of the cartoons the studio put out in the '60s ("The Sword in the Stone", "Robin Hood") were quite charming.
schedule 1 year ago
    JON FRAZIER
    JON FRAZIER
    Re: Watch the closing sequence of "Fantasia" (the Pastoral)

    You'll have to explain that. The closing sequence as I recall it was Night on Bald Mountain, which ends with church bells and Ave Maria driving the Devil and his host away as the sun begins to rise. Though I guess some Fundamentalists were perturbed by the earlier pieces using the evolution of life, and Greek mythology as backgrounds for the music.
    schedule 1 year ago
      Theodore Iacobuzio
      Theodore Iacobuzio
      You're right. I just checked. Maybe I stalked out in disgust before the end the last time Disney released it in theaters, which was quite awhile ago. Beethoven's Pastoral means a lot to me. Disney's boys set it in a kind of chocolate box Arcadia. There is much emphasis on the infant bottom, and "cute" little girl centaurs (so far as I know all centaurs are male). I mean it. Look. Really disturbing.
      schedule 1 year ago
        Bogdán Emil
        Bogdán Emil
        Hilarious. Now I will have to watch the film, which I've missed, for some reason. I have seen short clips over the years, and the impression I got was of an acid trip precursor. Accordingly, it's rooted in a Goethe poem about sorcery and invoking spirits.

        On the other hand, I used to watch Dumbo and Bambi lot as a kid, and felt they were decent, shockingly sad at times.
        schedule 1 year ago
Fran Macadam
Fran Macadam
I knew things were going in the other direction when Mickey left Minnie and ran off with Morty.
schedule 1 year ago
    Theodore Iacobuzio
    Theodore Iacobuzio
    You know the joke, right? Lawyer rises in Courtroom:

    LAWYER: Your honor, my client, Mickey Mouse, asks for this decree of divorce and I don't think this court will have much trouble granting it, on simple compassionate grounds. We intend to prove that Minnie Mouse is INSANE

    CONSTERNATION

    MICKEY [tugging at lawyer's suit coat]: I DIDN'T SAY THAT! I said she was effing Goofy.
    schedule 1 year ago
MPC
MPC
When we think about "white supremacy" and the legacy of slavery, who are we supposed to think of as the winner, the oppressor? Some poor southerner with a level of racial prejudice on par with the rest of humanity?

Or the white progressives of the professional middle class, who sip their lattes while they rage about inequality on the internet, who talk about prejudice while they, a powerful caste that controls the commanding heights of modern Western society, mock the vices and struggles of poor working class whites, and feign love for nonwhites, while doing evidently less than nothing to actually help them, as that would require distributing capital - which they disproprotionately control - not just bread and circuses, towards them.

Do these people think that accentuating racial divides culturally while doing nothing material to bridge them is of benefit to the people they pretend to love? Or do they know, at some level, that it's merely a cynical power ploy in their drive to finish off white conservatives, and that their "black friends" are merely political cannon fodder, who once the time comes to share the spoils will be left with perhaps even less a share of national capital than they had during Jim Crow's day?
schedule 1 year ago
    MPC
    MPC
    The hypocrisies do not stop. A country tilted drastically in favor of a "knowledge economy" and college degrees, which white progressives extremely disproportionately benefit from, and do not want to see an end to, and outsources its manufacturing and lower wage work to mass immigration and foreign countries - work that in the past, was by far and away the best path for class mobility for black America, emerging from slavery with little capital but plenty of muscle and technical skill.

    Upper middle class, the most progressive tilting class since the Trump era, is at the top of the inequality pyramid. Their attempts to discuss inequality, prejudice, and discrimination are laughable distractions that unfortunately serve to perpetuate their domination via distraction.

    Eventually the hypocrisy will be too great. The attempt by propagandists like Raveneau to hold together upper middle class progressive interests with a pretense of care for working class black interests will eventually be eaten by its contradictions.
    schedule 1 year ago
      Fran Macadam
      Fran Macadam
      As for their "Knowledge Community" they know more about less and less until they know everything about nothing.
      schedule 1 year ago
Ross Heckmann
Ross Heckmann
Rod, I'm through with Disney too; Disney and I simply don't have the same values. I mourn its loss, but am compelled to move on. But I must take exception to your statement: "White people from the North fought a war to free the slaves and preserve the Union. Nearly 600,000 white men from the North were killed, wounded, captured, or went missing in that epic fight. Their sacrifice, their memory, should not be erased." Rod, the North fought the Civil War to preserve the Union, not to free the slaves. The Union included four slave states: Maryland, Missouri, Delaware, and Kentucky. The Emancipation Proclamation attacked slavery only in the states that were still in rebellion, and did absolutely nothing to end slavery in the states that were in the Union. The Emancipation Proclamation was about ending the rebellion, not ending slavery. Lincoln said in a letter dated 8/22/1862 to Horace Greeley, editor of the New York Tribune, which stated in part: "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union." There you have it. 600,000 lives were sacrificed over power politics, not to end slavery.
schedule 1 year ago
    Theodore Iacobuzio
    Theodore Iacobuzio
    Well, first of all that 600,000 was total--North and South, so that's a mistake, yes. But I've heard this before and I don't buy it. It's what's forced down the throats of high school students today. The abolitionists were a tiny minority of the Northern political mix, but had they never existed I don't think there would have been any Civil War. (You say, what about the Radical Republicans--but their control of Congress didn't happen until after Secession. It's true that there was a hubristic element in the Slave Power (as Henry Adams called it) that wanted to see the institution's extension into much of the Southwest, if not California; but psychologically you can attribute that to the William Lloyd Garrisons et al. If there was no movement to ban the institution there it would not have come to shooting. Also, please remember, Lincoln was nothing if not a politician. He fought the war (except for the habeas corpus breach) always wanting everybody to see he had the law on his side. There's no denying that the 3/5 rule more or less wrote Slavery into the Constitution, which is why the Emancipation Proclamation was written the way it was. But if abolition was not on the table it would never have come to shooting, in my view. Also, look at what the Republicans got up to while the war was going on: the Homestead Act, the Land-Grant Universities. I think that morally Dreher is correct.
    schedule 1 year ago
      Theodore Iacobuzio
      Theodore Iacobuzio
      Oh, and Lincoln's position was on the head of a very sharp legalistic pin. His argument was that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT could do nothing about slavery in those states where it was ALREADY legal. If you want a sample of his thoughts on the institution itself, read the Douglas debates.
      schedule 1 year ago