PA Vol. 59: Was Dr. Seuss a Racist?

The Profound Assholes are back. This time, we're talking Dr. Seuss. And, oh look! There's a Shiny Gingawd in our presence. Check out our thoughts on Dr. Seuss, given the "racist propaganda" librarian, below.

Speed: Apparently, if you let some people tell it, Dr. Seuss was a not-so undercover racist and liking his shit is racist. At least, that's what Twitter and that librarian are telling me. Like, here's the thing. I know he did some racist-ass shit in line with caricatures and whatnot, but I wouldn't go as far to say something like "oh, The Cat in the Hat is a kids minstrel show."

Drizzle: He was anti-racist.

Gingawd: Elaborate.

Drizzle: Several of his books openly say racism is bad.

Speed: But, again, he did draw some pretty out there shit. However, he got enlightened. You right.

Gingawd: But which ones?

Drizzle: All of his WWII work pretty much played with the idea that "racism is for idiots." And, yes, I'm aware of his use of the "bucktooth" stereotype when portraying General Tojo and the Japanese. He's a complicated man, like all men. But, his "America First" cartoon pointed out the absurdity of pointing a blind eye at Hitler.


Speed: I was more so talking about his Flit bug spray ads.

Drizzle: Right. He did so some racist shit--like, super racist shit--in his early years. Here are some examples.



He eventually flipped that around, though, after he got woke. There's a great example that pretty much acts as a "fuck you" to his previous editor.


He was really big into anti-prejudice during parts of WWII because he knew that Whites, Blacks, and all that, we had a common enemy. Fascism.

Speed: Now, I'm all for calling out racism when I see it. Seuss had some racist-ass shit. But, he was a convert. He saw the error of his ways and he rectified his train of thought. That's why I have a slight issue with that librarian calling Seuss a full-blown racist and his books "racist propaganda."

Gingawd: I thought that once someone truly repents their evil ways, you're supposed to forgive them.

Drizzle: People never read the whole story. They see that the beginning is racist, so they don't read past that to fit agendas.

Gingawd: When was Seuss born?

Speed: 1901, I believe.

Drizzle: 1904.

Gingawd: So, you also have to add that to the account that he was way ahead of his time.

Drizzle: The fact that the prejudice bug cartoon was a direct fuck you to the Flit cartoons shows that he may have not been racist at all. He might have just been told to draw that shit and the latter cartoon is his response. But, you're right. In the '40s, he was making racial equality political cartoons.

Speed: And in the '50s, he was writing Horton Hears a Who, an allegory about post-war Japan and how Japan and America needed to work together to rebuild what they--read: America--blew apart. Why? A person is a person, no matter how "small" they seem in someone else's eyes.

Drizzle: In some of his articles, Dr. Seuss said he hated Flit for everything it did. Racism, over-industrialization, bringing poisons into the home. He says he only did that shit to pay the bills while he wrote his books. The Lorax was a direct fuck you to Flit's over-industrialization. The "prejudice bug" was a direct response to its racism. Google it.

Gingawd: It's interesting how many authors feared and hated industrialization.

Drizzle: To add onto Speed's point, Horton was also a response to the office politics and how big corporations decide the lives of people they rarely recognize exist. Bruh was deep. The predictions are already coming true. Look at so-called "superfund sites." 

Gingawd: So, we can all agree. People are dumb. People should really read the whole story. That's a huge problem and always has been. Given choice exhaustion, it's become more of an issue. 

Speed: So, in short, Dr. Seuss wasn't a full-blown racist and enlightened himself against his previous fuckery and people should read a book, not just skim through the chapters that highlight their ideals? 

Gingawd: Precisely. 

No comments