Did South Park just release its most controversial episode yet? I’m doubtful. The animated show created by comedians Trey Parker and Matt Stone revolves around the absurd adventures of four elementary school students and their friends and family in South Park, Colorado. South Park has been a vessel of dark humor and satirical comedy since it first aired. The show has mocked anyone and anything – Donald Trump, the Chinese government, the Church of Latter Day Saints, gays, Muslims, Jews, disabled people – the list goes on. One of the characters, Eric Cartman, even has a long-running bit about hating Jews and in one episode he is portrayed as Hitler.
The show has drawn controversy for one of it’s latest episodes in which it accuses Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of genocide and war crimes. How does the show choose to do this? By sending Sheila Broflovski, the mother of the beloved Jewish character Kyle, to Israel to tell him herself.
The essence of the show is controversy, that’s what has made it such an enjoyable watch for viewers over the past almost twenty years. We don’t have to say that South Park isn’t afraid to be politically incorrect, because its purpose since its inception was to entertain inflammatory and offensive rhetoric and spin it as comedy. This is something that the show has mastered. Underneath all of the dark humor, South Park makes meaningful commentary on social issues, from the crisis of school shootings in America, to the hypocrisy of political correctness. You don’t have to jump through multiple episodes to find it, South Park at its core is a political commentary that does not subscribe to a certain code of ethics. And on top of that, the show is genuinely funny.
Throughout the episode, Sheila is pestered by her friends to make a public statement on the ongoing war in Gaza. She initially responds that “It’s all horrible.” When her friends question if she’s going to take any action, she bursts out saying “Are you implying that the Jews of America have some kind of obligation to do something about it? … You want to vilify my faith! It’s not Jews vs Palestine, it’s Israel vs Palestine!”
Frustrated about her community’s assumption that she has some sort of responsibility for what’s happening in Palestine, she decides to take matters into her own hands. At the end of the episode, she arrives in Israel and bursts into Netanyahu’s office. She berates him for killing thousands of Gazans and shielding his actions with Judaism. She finally accuses him of making life for Jews “miserable,” and more importantly, “impossible” for American Jews. The episode ends with her tearing into him in true Jewish mom fashion.
Do I think the writers were trying to make a statement in this episode either way? Absolutely, that’s the point. On one hand, they recognize the absurdity of blaming Jews in diaspora (or anywhere, for that matter) for the war, a commentary on how quickly political discourse spirals into performative outrage. On the other hand, they send a Jewish woman to blame the Jewish prime minister for rising global antisemitism, which blurs the lines of religious identity and political responsibility. It reinforces this idea that Jewish people must not only take false responsibility, but that they are also at fault for their own persecution. Shifting the blame to Jews for antisemitism isn’t new, it has simply been repackaged as the new form of performative activism. In reality, it is one of the oldest and cruelest expressions of hatred.
So, who exactly are the writers calling out? The target has been shallowly chalked up to by many as the Jewish people. Many viewers saw Netanyahu being called out and hailed it a triumph for the pro-Palestine movement and, by default, a smear on the Jewish community. However, this is the exact narrow mindset they are calling out. I believe that even if some people in the Jewish community find it offensive that South Park directly calls out Netanyhu for being responsible for deaths in Gaza, the real critique is against those who truly blame Jews for conflicts in the Middle East. I also ask why, exactly, criticizing Netanyahu would be an attack on the Jewish community? Nuance is lost in various aspects of this conversation. The episode isn’t meant to make viewers mad that Netanyahu is being called out, in fact, the writers suggest that he should be. This criticism is framed through a satirical lens, forcing reflection rather than outrage. Instead of telling viewers what to think, the episode forces them to confront how they think. South Park isn’t telling you to blame antisemitism on Jews, they’re mocking you for doing just that.
I think some people might view this criticism of Netanyahu as South Park going “woke,” but that’s a reductive conclusion. South Park has always been “woke” in its own sense, not in the performative way we often see, but in the sense of being aware just how ridiculous society can be. The show doesn’t align itself with the political left or right because it understands they’re two sides of the same ridiculous coin. Its satire pushes public morality until something cracks. In this case, it’s the realization that conversations about Israel and Palestine often fall into binary narratives with no room for nuance or humanity.
Anyone can be the butt of the joke on South Park, that’s the beauty of it. Parker and Stone created a world where no religion, ideology, or public figure is above criticism. The point of the show has never been about picking a political stance, but rather holding up a mirror to society’s hypocrisies. The show’s genius lies in how it uses humor to make people uncomfortable enough to think, even when the jokes hit close to home.
