1. “These perspectives which endorse the primacy of animation as a specific and unique
form of creative expression sit at an extreme from its position within the academic
practice of Film Studies; [animation’s] perceived role as merely ‘children’s
entertainment’; and its previously marginalized function as a television ‘schedule filler’.
In the contemporary era, however, this is changing” – Paul Wells, “Animation and
America”
Introduction
Animated television, despite the support of well respected media scholars such as
Jason Mittell and Sarah Banet-Weiser, still carries the stigma that because the bulk of it is
meant for children, it is undeserving of true scholarship. While much has changed in the
past forty years since scholars have begun to seriously study television in relation to
hegemony and ideology, animated television has not fully shared the bounty of this
newfound respect. In order to legitimize the field, many have made the choice to only
study adult animated shows such as The Simpsons, Family Guy, and other programs that
appear during primetime or carry ratings of TV-MA or TV-14. They cannot be fully
blamed though, since they are only following society’ss views on animation. However I
believe that like the rest of television, animated television made specifically for the target
audiences of 6-11 and 9-14 can be studied in terms of ideological value and hegemonic
compliance as defined by Louis Althusser and Stuart Hall. In fact in the past decade we
have seen more diversity in the portrayal of different ideologies and forms of
governments, specifically political ideologies, in American animated television shows. In
this essay, through close textual analysis of current animated television shows such as
The Legend of Korra compared to older shows, I will defend my conclusion that this push
back against the hegemony in America is good for children.
Before I begin, I must further explain my reasoning for choosing youth animated
television in America. The flexibility of animation allows, especially in the youth market,
different ideologies to be portrayed in unique ways. By not being directly linking to

2. reality in the way that live-action shows do, animated television can claim a defense of
fantasy when confronted about counter-cultural ideas. These shows also provide more
diversity in terms of genre. Most, if not all, popular adult animated shows are squarely
footed in comedy. While dramatic elements are present in most of these shows, they are
presented primarily as comedic entertainment. Children animated shows however, have
evolved to include dramatic shows in the genre of action-adventure. This is important
when discussing hegemony because the subject matter is taking itself seriously, thus
making it something to be taken seriously. Also, there are simply more animated shows
for children than live action. “Although its schedule includes live-action shows as well,
the majority of Nickelodeon’s programming has been animated” (Stabile, 66). There is
also the fact that in today’s market, we tend to see youth animation reach past its intended
audience. Shows such as My Little Pony and Adventure Time enjoy the viewership of
children, college students, and adults. Finally when I say “youth animated television in
America” I am referring to shows that can be physically animated anywhere, but whose
main script, voice acting, and distribution initially originates in America. I am also
excluding shows that were created for the internet, such as Bee and PuppyCat and
Bravest Warriors, but not shows that either began on television and ended up finishing
their run on the internet or shows that began on the internet but had the majority of their
episodes in television. This distinction is important because shows that do not rely on
airing time from major broadcasters, support from corporate advertising, and regulations
from the federal governments cannot be considered part of the ideological state apparatus
(ISA) that is television. While online animated shows have a greater capacity to be
countercultural due to their lack of regulation, this essay is primarily concerned with how
shows have changed ideologically within the constraints of television in the past few

3. decades.
History of The Public Good
As said before, television is an ideological state apparatus, under the
communications division (though I would also describe it as a cultural ISA as well). In
“Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays” Althusser wrote, “I shall call Ideological State
Apparatuses a certain number of realities which present themselves to the immediate
observer in the form of distinct and specialized institutions”(Althusser). Though much
has changed since its inception, television comes from a history of being considered a
public good that needed to be regulated for the public interest. The FCC’s Public Service
Responsibility for Broadcast Licensees report, also known as the Blue Book due to the
color of the cover, came out in 1946 and affected first radio, then TV with guidelines on
what is considered good for the public interest. Though largely ignored, it paved the way
for stricter guidelines. Despite the best intentions of lawmakers, it can be assumed that
the term “public good” is almost synonymous with the term “hegemony” when a
government or big corporation uses it. The use of television to establish that the status
quo is normal and to deter any sign of deviance in society is what these laws were made
to do. The 1960 Programming Policy Statement officially defined both programs for
children and entertainment programming as two of 14 "major elements usually necessary
to the public interest" (Final Report of The Advisory Committee on Public Interest
Obligations of Digital Television Broadcasters). This was followed by a statement in
1974 that specifically said that broadcasters needed to service children. However, this
would soon pass during the Reagan administration. In 1984 deregulation was enacted and

4. in 1988 Reagan vetoed a measure to constrict when children programming can be shown
and what can be shown. This however, did not change the base, nor the superstructure.
According to Carol Stabile, “by the 1980s, most animated programs were little
more than poorly drawn, glorified half-hour commercials for action figures and video
games. These shows included such notables as Care Bears, My Little Pony…”(Stabile,
78) . With the deregulation of cartoons, children’s television had to bow to a new master,
consumerism. TV shows such as G.I Joe were made to sell both toys and advertisements.
Later on, I will go into more detail on what this means for ideology. In 1990 Congress
passed The Children's Television Act of 1990, which both limited the amount of
advertising companies could do for children shows, but also required a total of three
hours a week worth of educational material. However, the commercialism that came in
with the 1980’s stayed. So why is this history important in understanding the ideology in
animated shows? With the need to appease government regulations, advertisers that
prefer less controversy, marketing teams that prefer easy content to pull from, and parents
that expect ‘wholesome television’, creating shows that challenge these influencers is
incredibly unappealing and makes little sense when considering revenue. There are many
examples of American animated television shows acting as ISA’s to establish American
exceptionalism and democracy as natural, while painting other cultures and their
governments as strange and wrong.
Ducks and Soldiers
Generally, it was held that the political socialization of youth occurred primarily
in three places: in the family, where children and adolescents are seen to be influenced by
their parents' political beliefs; at school, where citizenship and patriotis are often included

5. in mission statements of American public schools (as well as in voluntary youth
organizations, such as the Boy Scouts); and in the media where information about official
politics and political figures is disseminated (Banet-weiser, Kids Rule).
Despite animation being regulated to a juvenile form of entertainment, or maybe
precisely because of its status as being for kids, it became an easy target for propaganda.
From the overt to the obscure, cartoons have been used to reinforce American politics
and ideology. Take the 1942 academy award winning short called “Der Fueher’s Face”
starring Donald Duck. Donald is forced to work in a factory, creating weapons for the
Axis in Nazi Germany. The eight-minute short includes a catchy tune deriding Hitler and
racist caricatures of the Japanese. The nightmare ends with Donald duck waking up in his
American flag pajamas to the image to the statue of liberty sitting on a windowsill with
American flag drape, and a tomato being thrown into the face of Hitler. This is but one
of many cartoons featuring Donald Duck as propaganda for the United States, fighting
Nazis, the Japanese empire, and the Russians. Other cartoons at the time, such as “
G.I. Joe is arguably one of the most memorable and financially successful cartoon
franchises to come out of the 80’s with six animated shows, two live action movies,
multiple video games, and more action figures than I am willing to list. It is easy to
ignore animated shows made during this time due to their consumerist birth. Many
scholars do. This would be an error in judgment though. By partaking in American
commercialism and neo-liberal ideas on war and work, G.I Joe and other cartoons from
the same time period created an era of cartoons worthy of study.
Yet the stories told by these series reveal much more about the
times in which they were created and watched and are of
importance because they hold significant meaning in relation to the

6. cultural and political contexts of 1980s' America. (Geraghtry, 291)
It is impossible to study the ideological representations in today’s animation without
studying the ideological representation of the previous generations of cartoons. G.I. Joe
acted within the ISA of television through the use of PSA’s (Public Service
Announcments) (Geraghtry, 299). With messages like standing ones ground, working as
a team, and the tagline “A real American Hero”, G.I. Joe created a fictional universe in
which the Joes instilled hegemony and protected the base and superstructure of American
culture by instilling core beliefs about right and wrong into children while attributing
these “good” beliefs to the U.S military. C.O.B.R.A, the main villains, are not an enemy
country like the villains were in the 1940’s propaganda shorts. No, they represented a
new type of enemy to America that worked more like to a company than a country. Much
like the enemies that America was facing in the Tanker War, the Invasion of Grenada,
and the Vietnam War, Cobra was a new type of enemy that America needed to vilify in
order to establish ideological superiority. Cobra is not a country, but a company. With
many toys to sell, G.I Joe had no reason to rock the boat and face the ire of advertisers
and the government. Other shows of the same era like CyberCOPS and Rambo: The
Force of Freedom also upheld the same American ideals as G.I. Joe. Both of these shows
suggest deference to The United States military and police systems, systems that defend
the American constitutional republic. Now, before we get to the modern era, we must talk
about the time period between the mid 90’s and early 2000’s.
The Radical 90’s
This next period of time can be mostly separated into three different divisions:
company driven shows (much like G.I Joe), artist driven shows, and Japanese animation.
Earlier I specified that I will not include Japanese animation into my analysis, but it

7. would be negligent to totally disregard their existence in American television due to their
effect on future American animated shows, in both art and in the showing of complex
ideological states. Japanese animation has been shown on American airwaves since the
1960’s with shows like Astro Boy, Kimba the Whire Lion and Speed Racer. Transformers
was already mentioned for its popularity in the 1980s. Robotech was an incredibly mature
show that found success commercially in America. However, I am pinpointing the 90’s
specifically for Japanese animation due to its overwhelming popularity during this time.
Licensing companies made specifically for acquiring, editing, and dubbing (replacing the
Japanese voice actors with American ones) came into prominence during this time.
Cartoon Network had Toonami, an anime late night block, while Kids WB would
consistently show anime throughout the week as well as during Saturday mornings. The
Fox Block and ABC Kids also showed anime during the prime Saturday morning block.
Most of these shows were edited to erase the nature of the Japanese culture. However,
many of the complex story lines and deep emotional character plots stayed the same and
would be an influence on western shows. As Carol Stabile says in her book, “Made for
television animation in Japan always assumed a high degree of possible maturity in its
audience as well as catering for its younger clientele, while in the US animation
represented a problem if it transgressed an easy positioning in a taken-for-granted
children’s market” (Stabile, 29). During this time period, Japanese shows were serious
competition for homegrown shows. Since the 90’s and early 2000’s, Japanese shows
have seen a great decline in being shown on television for children, with much of the
market shifting to older members of society who consume their shows online. While I
could probably write an entire book talking about how Japanese animation influenced
American animation, for the sake of brevity I will simply leave it at the fact that during

8. the 90’s and early 2000’s Japanese animated television shows found its biggest success in
the United States and significantly influenced many shows in the current era, including
The Avatar series, which will be the focus of my main examples. Besides the great
anime revolution, American cartoons were going through a renaissance on both the little
screen and the big screen. While Disney was creating some of its most successful movies,
Cartoon Network and Nickelodeon began to come into their own as powerhouses for
children animation. Much of this success is due to two factors: Cable television and
creator centered shows. With the rise of cable, television channels could form more niche
audiences and target children very specifically. “This practice presaged the logic of
narrowcasting that would predominate in the 1990s, as market segments were constituted
both by appealing to core groups of children and by driving away undesirable adult
audiences (Turow 1997)” (Stabile, 49). Ironic as it may seem, the freedom that made
cartoons in the 80’s generic and easily marketable for toys eventually gave rise to a new
generation of cartoons that were marked by creativity. The deregulation of the industry
allowed creators to explore artistic avenues that didn’t necessarily have anything to do
with the public good. Through the subscription and multi-tiered format of cable along
with DVD sales, toy sale and merchandizing did not have to carry almost all of the bulk
of the monetary aspects of shows. This is why shows that did not feature large ensemble
casts or easily sellable accessories could flourish. All of this led the way for Creator
driven shows, and the beginning of a diverse landscape of political ideologies.
With animation blocks such as “Nicktoons”, “What a Cartoon”, and “Cartoon
Cartoons”, animators where given a chance to expand their creative muscles. ““What a
Cartoon” premiered over 50 shorts that were given the chance to become full fledged
cartoons on Cartoon Network. With outside talent pitching show ideas, more diverse

9. shows were created. Powerpuff Girls, one of the many shows that came from this
animation experiment, continually challenged the idea of the patriarchal system in
America, as well as the effectiveness of elected officials. The town’s mayor is probably
one of the most incompetent individuals on the show, with his assistant taking up most of
the slack. While the main heroines work with the government openly, they have a direct
line to city hall and their identities are not secrets, they work as semi-vigilante agents that
can operate with or without the government and generally know better than the person
that was elected to serve as mayor. Codename: Kids Next Door, another product of this
era, has the premise of challenging the authority adults and the almost tyrannical system
that they have created. The democracy of America, and the world in general, is shown as
a caste system with adults at the top, teenagers in the middle, and children as the lowest
caste. Banet-Weiser highlights Nickelodeon as the progenitor of this trend by stating,
“By insisting on creator-driven animation in the licensed-toy
environment, Nickelodeon was seen as bucking the system," thus
highlighting the ethos of empowerment championed by the channel
at a historical and commercial moment where rebellious upstart
companies were quickly gaining cultural capital.( Banet-Weiser,
185)
A show like Samurai Jack, which is an art-house like show that focuses on a
character that is transported to a cyber-punk dictatorship dystopian future, would not
have been able to survive the 80’s, with its focus on anarchy and minimal dialogue.
However, the animation revolution of the 90’s and early 2000’s provided a perfect safe
haven for shows that were beginning to test the waters, contrasting political ideology in

10. mainstream animation for children. These shows served as the predecessors for the
animations of today that candidly buck the hegemony that reinforces the one sided
showing of the American political ideology.
It is important to emphasize that these divisions that I have defined are not hard
set. There is no definite date that one begins and another ends. The commercialism of the
1980’s does not magically disappear once 1995 begins. From 2010 until 2014 Hasbro
entered a joint venture with Discovery Communications and changed Discovery Kids to
The Hub. As head of programming, Hasbro switched most of educational themed
animated shows to Hasbro product themed shows such as The Transformers, G.I Joe, and
My Little Pony. If it was not for the upgrade in animation technology and modern pop
culture references, one could easily mistake that line up for being antiquated. Even after
Discovery Communications bought majority shares of the channel and changed the name
to Discovery Channel, many of the Hasbro inspired shows still exist. While there may be
less shows being created with the intent of only selling toys and merchandising,
merchandising still plays a very big role in the life of these shows. Likewise, not all
children animated shows made in the 1980’s were created simply for selling toys, nor
were the creators of these shows necessarily any less creative than creators now. Broad
strokes must be painted to classify general trends found in different periods of time, but it
can be dangerous to assume that every show in my designated eras is exactly the same.
One can easily claim that the 1970’s deserve its own section, or that we are still in the age
of the 90’s. However, the purposes of this essay, a divide between the 90’s and the
present time must be made, no matter how fuzzy the line may seem to be.
The Modern Age
In this next section, I will now focus on the shows in this modern era. For this

11. study, I will focus on three shows and how they portray different political systems and
ideologies in both positive and negative lights. These show are: Avatar the Airbender
(2005), Adventure Time (2010), and The Legend of Korra (2012), which will make up the
bulk of the essay. I will break up the sections not by individual show, but by both
political ideology and governmental structure in order to better compare and contrast
these shows. While there will obviously be some overlap, since certain forms of
governments can have different political ideologies, I will try to divide it as cleanly as
possible. The importance of these shows having different views on these ideologies and
structures is that it allows children to be introduced to multiple forms of the same types of
governments, coercing them to see different views. The Legend of Korra is actually
divided into four books with each antagonist representing a different ideology:
Communism, theocratic environmentalism, anarchy, and fascism. The first topic that I
will cover will be the portrayal of monarchy. Each of these series portrayed monarchies
in different ways. These different portrayals show both the positive and negative aspects
of monarchial rule.
The Monarchy
First, I will begin with the most positive portrayal of monarchy. In the show
Adventure time, which has its main form of government as a monarchy, the world is
divided by different kingdoms ruled by Kings or princesses. Most of these kingdoms are
absolute monarchies. The Kingdom that is explored the most though is The Candy
Kingdom, ruled by Princess Bubblegum. Princess Bubblegum not only created the
Candy Kingdom, but she also created the Candy Kingdom. There are no advisors or a
parliament that she must listen to in order to make her decisions. Her world is literally the
word of god, and Candy’s subjects are shown time and time again to be too incompetent

12. to properly function without her guidance. In fact, there is strong evidence that Princess
Bubblegum runs a fascist regime that is based on an extreme utilitarianist stance. She
controls every aspect of her subjects’ lives. In the episodes “You Made Me” and “The
Cooler,” and “Nemesis” it is shown that Princess Bubblegum uses giant computers and a
wide array of surveillance cameras to view not just the candy kingdom and its people, but
also other kingdoms. When confronted on her spying by The Flame Princess of the
hereditary monarchy The Flame Kingdom in “The Cooler” Princess Bubblegum
exclaims, “I'm PB! I spy on everybody. No big D!”. This is said after we learn that she
created an elaborate plan to either destroy the Flame Kingdoms ancient weapons or kill
everyone in the Kingdom. In “Graybles 1000+” The audience is shown that in the future
she not only puts tracking devices in her citizens teeth, but she puts them all in stasis
chambers for an indefinite amount of time. There are many other examples of her
absolute rule, such as creating her immortal successor that has the ability to read minds
and control others, and cloning a subject after sacrificing them to save the kingdom. One
of the most interesting things about this is that she is rarely shown as being in the wrong.
The main character, Finn, has some reservations about her cloning her subjects, but only
voices his confliction to his friend Jake. The only other example is, as stated above, when
Flame Princess pointed out that she is “a bad person”. In fact, we later see that without
her, The Kingdom does not function well at all.
In the episode “Hot Diggity Doom,” the kingdom holds a vote to decide who
should be the Princess, in the fashion of an elective monarchy where each citizen votes.
Running against Princess Bubblegum, who barely pays attention to the election due to an
oncoming crisis and the belief that her creating the Candy Kingdom would give her an
automatic win, is a man by the name if King of Oo, a man who may also be in charge of a

13. cult like organization. The people vote for the King of Oo, despite his general lack of
knowledge. Already, an obvious change in leadership is signified when the King sings,
“There’s cheap healthcare, the work camp’s there, the general tone is laizze a faire”. The
Candy People do not show any concern. Princess Bubblegum notes how stupid the
candy people are, and their actions show that they cannot properly function under
anybody else but her, their god. The King is shown to be an idiot who is easily swayed
by his fellow con artist friend, Toronto. The next season shows him creating a despotic
rule that uses the candy people as items. It is shown that much of the military still
supports the rule of the princess and will listen to her over him. Ultimately, Princess
Bubblegum shows that his time as ruler of the Candy Kingdom only exists because she
allows it. In the episode “Taker Her Back”, she barges into the castle with her sick
friend. She screams, “Monarchies are not democracies!” and kicks him. The guards react
not by arresting her, but by asking her if they should listen to the King of Oo or not.
Later, after the Candy people revolt and burn the King Oo and Princess Crunchy takes
over in a power grab, Princess Bubblegum regains her throne.
The one exception to the positive outlook on the monarchy is The Earldom of
Lemongrab, an earldom that is separate from the Candy Kingdom but still technically
underneath the rule of Princess Bubblegum. The Earl of Lemongrab, a failed experiment
of Princess Bubblegum, leads a dictatorship that reflects North Korea. However, I will
return to the earldom when I talk more about fascism. Adventure Time shows monarchies,
especially conservative absolute monarchies, as the superior form of government and
political ideology. Avatar the Last Air Bender and Legend of Korra, however, have a
very different outlook on Monarchy.
In the world of the Avatar series, there are two main states that use a monarchial

14. system: The militaristic absolute monarchy of the Fire Nation and the federal monarchy
of the Earth Kingdom. It should be noted though that the city of Omashu, while
technically under the rule of the Earth Kingdom, has its own monarch and tends to acts in
a totally autonomous nature. It is arguably the strongest city in the Earth Kingdom and
listens only to its own absolute monarch, which is King Bumi in Avatar: The Last
Airbender. Though very little time is spent in Omashu, it is one of the most positive
presentations of the monarchial system there is. The fire nation in Avatar: The Last
Airbender is shown as a complex system of governorships under the King. It is the main
antagonist of the series, wiping out the air nomads and conquering The Water tribes and
the Earth Kingdom. The empire consists of the mainlaind and multiple colonies made up
of conquered land. A clear class division is created, in which the fire nation citizens are
controlled mainly through IFA’s such as school and festivals that instill nationalism while
earth and water citizens are mainly controlled through RFA’s such as threats of working
in a camp and police brutality. Nationalism defines the Fire Nation. Pure fire nation
citizens are seen as unique and superior to others, part of their justification for their
imperialistic nature. An easy comparison to a real world example is War World Two era
Japan. Due to the size of both the Fire Nation and the Earth Kingdom, their systems
become more decentralized the further one gets from the capital where the leaders are.
Like the Candy Kingdom, both adhere more to a classical conservatism ideology, though
they have some liberal streaks to them. During the Legend of Korra, The Fire Kingdom is
scaled back in side and has a more benevolent and less militaristic leader. The Earth
Kingdom has a more problematic history with monarchs however.
As stated before, The Earth Kingdom is a Federal Monarchy. However, the king
is simply a puppet figure for the grand secretariat, who is also head of the secret police.

15. Ba Sing Se is a fascist state. Citizens in the main part of the city of Ba Sing Se are not
allowed to leave the city or know anything about the war. Even the King is kept in the
dark. Citizens who know anything about the war feign ignorance for fear of going to
Lake Laogai. Lake Laogai is a government brainwashing facility that is run by the grand
secretariat and his loyal secret police, kept secret from the military and the king. Groups
of citizens are brainwashed into believing they are the same person, to act as unwilling
spies. In season two episode fourteen he says,
Until now, you've been treated as our honored guests. But from now on,
you will be watched every moment by Dai Li Agents. If you mention the
war to anyone, you will be expelled from the city… What's most
important to his royal majesty is maintaining the cultural heritage of Ba
Sing Se. All his duties relate to issuing decrees on such matters. It's my
job to oversea the rest of the city's resources, including the military. …It is
the strict policy of Ba Sing Se that the war not be mentioned within the
walls. Constant news of an escalating war will throw the citizens of Ba
Sing Se into a state of panic. Our economy would be ruined. Our peaceful
way of life, our traditions would disappear. In silencing talk of conflict, Ba
Sing Se remains a peaceful, orderly utopia. The last one on Earth.
Though he is eventually taken out of power and the incompetent but benevolent king is
put in place, the next monarch leads as an absolute monarch who controls every aspect of
her citizens’ lives, raising taxes and forcing powerful benders to fight in her army. She is
eventually assassinated and after a brief time of anarchy and fascism, her successor
eliminates the monarchy all together. The Earth Kingdom can be compared to the Ming
Dynasty of China due to its use of a grand secretariat.

16. Unlike Adventure Time, most of the rulers in the monarchies of Avatar the Last
Airbender and The Legend of Korra are cruel and controlling. These shows are not
ambiguous about their stance on monarchies. What is slightly counter-hegemonic about
these shows is that they are willing to show both the positive and negative side of this
form of government and the ideologies that come with them. The youth audience is
forced to come to the conclusion that one form of government is not inherently good or
bad. They are also shown how easily government can be changed within one nation. This
is especially in the Legend of Korra.
Anarchy and Freedom
In this section I talk about both Anarchy and the idea of freedom in general
because while only The Legend of Korra has a character that is outright anarchistic, there
are characters that show an aversion to government, or at least being underneath a
governmental rule. The third season of legend of Korra features the antagonist Zaheer,
the leader of a section of an anarchist group known as The Red Lotus. His organization
strongly believes that the world does not need nations or the avatar to exist. His
militaristic nature leads to chaos on the Earth Kingdom after he assassinates the Queen by
sucking the air out of her lungs. He also successfully paralyzes Korra. I use antagonist
rather than villain because the show portrays him, like all of Legend of Korra’s main
villains, as a wise individual with a strong sense of justice. Even when she disagrees with
his method, Korra is forced to see the merit of his philosophy. Although Korra knew that
the Queen of the Earth Kingdom was harming her citizens and that the president of
Republic City was a cowardly politician, she had very little agency to act on her sense of
justice. Zaheer claimed to stand for the people, and followed through by killing the
Queen. This nuanced view of showing Zaheer to have moral superiority over the main

17. character makes the viewer question what ideology is most effective by having Korra
question the same thing. His words do not reflect the posture of a blood crazy terrorist,
but a wise revolutionist. With phrases such as, “True freedom can only be achieved when
oppressive governments are torn down”, and “You think freedom is something that you
can give or take on a whim. But to your people, freedom is just as essential as air and
without it, there is no life”, Zaheer is put in the category of anti-hero. This is truly
counter-hegemonic, because a convincing individual directly contests the American
ideology of patriotism. While America may not be as oppressive as the Earth Kingdom,
it certainty teaches that a government is needed for a functioning society. With the
exception of the Revolutionary War any sign of a possible violent revolution, like with
many members of the black power movement, is condemned. Even though he ultimately
loses the fight, he succeeds in making Korra doubt herself and what she stands for. He is
even redeemed in the next season when he helps her spiritually heal. By allowing him to
be shown as a sympathetic figure and a teacher for the main character without having him
compromise his beliefs, his anarchist ideology is given even more credence. By never
having to admit that his core beliefs were wrong, Zaheer’s ideology is never completely
disregarded as evil or incorrect by the creators.
Neither of the other shows have such a strong defense of, nor even showing of
anarchy. The closest thing that Avatar:The Last Airbender has are the air nomads, a
group of individuals that Zaheer bases his more violent ideology on. In Adventure Time,
which highly favors the idea of the monarchy, characters such as Finn and Jake live
outside of any specific kingdom. They are autonomous in nature and mostly do what
they want. However, they have sworn allegiance to Princess Bubblegum and
consequently the Candy Kingdom. They support the monarchial system, even when they

18. choose to physically live outside of it. The character Lemonhope, much like Zaheer, is
enamored with freedom and acknowledges that being tied to any specific nature takes
away freedom. However, his focus is more individualistic. When told by Princess
Bubblegum that he is supposed to free his fellow lemon people from the fascist regime of
the Earl of Lemongrab, he refuses to be responsible for the earldom. Even staying in the
Candy Kingdom after being rescued from the earldom is too restrictive, and he leaves. He
screams, “I don't have to do anything that I don't want to. They set me free, and free
means I decide what I do, not them and not you”. Unlike Zaheer, his dislike of
government or authority is not a righteous indignation. He is an anarchist for not
recognizing any government or government official, like Princess Bubblegum, as his
leader. Even when he eventually saves the earldom, it is done to ease his guilt. He
promptly refuses to live with Princess Bubblegum and rebuild the earldom, instead opting
to travel. Lemonhope is closer to a libertarian than an anarchist, since his aversion of
government comes from the limited individual freedom that society and governments
place on people. However, his choices are never shown to be inherently wrong. While
Princess Bubblegum shows some frustration and disappointment because she believes
that he is shirking his responsibility, his decision to roam around is accepted by everyone.
While it is true that two core American ideologies are self-determinism and individuality,
they are only seen as positive qualities when they exist within the state. Lemonhope is
counter-hegemonic because his belief system both goes against the idea of sacrifice for
one’s country and because it is shown as a viable ideology for someone to have.
Communism, Socialism, and Fascism
I decided to put these three together due to the fact that they mostly exist in just
Legend of Korra. The only true existence of fascism in these show is in the form of the

19. Earldom of Lemongrab, as I stated earlier. The Earl uses a reconditioning chamber on the
Pup Gang when in the episode “You Made Me” they refuse to follow his orders,
electrocuting the children at an extremely high voltage. His catch phrase is
“Unacceptable”, an exclamation that he screams whenever something is not happening to
his liking. He eventually finds Princess Bubblegum’s candy life formula and creates his
earldom full of lemon people, people that he enslaves. He eventually eats the clone
companion that the princess made for him due to the possibility of opposition. The
creators make sure that it is obvious that he is fascist, even going as far as having a short
propaganda film made. Unlike the other forms of governments that have been discussed,
fascism is shown to be inherently wrong. Lemongrab has no redeeming qualities and
actually has to be deposed by Lemonhope so that Princess Bubblegum can make him less
tyrannical.
The first antagonist that Korra fights is Amon, a masked figure who stands for the
common man. There is a clear difference in class in Republic city between those who can
bend the elements and those who cannot. Amon begins to create unrest and holds rallies
calling for equality, equality than can be achieved through his unique ability to take away
bending abilities. This puts him in direct opposition with Korra, one of the most prolific
benders alive due to being the avatar. During a speech he exclaims,
For centuries, benders have possessed an unnatural advantage over
ordinary people. But thankfully, modern technology has provided us with
an opportunity to even out the playing field. Now, anyone can hold the
power of a chi-blocker in their hand. My followers and I will not rest until
the entire city achieves equality. And once that goal is achieved, we will
equalize the rest of the world! The Revolution has begun!

20. His followers, The Equalists, support Amon. Amon represents a communist
revolutionary due to his wanting to eradicate inequality and the use of advanced
technology in lieu of bending. Unlike in older cartoons where Communists are seen as
evil and completely wrong, Amon and his follower are shown to have valid opinions that
force the heroine to reassess her stance on the issue. Even though Amon ended up being
exposed as a bender, the points he made about inequality in Republic City were still
accepted as true. The fact that the two main leaders ended up being benders that used the
nonbenders and that the non-benders never saw any lasting change reinforces the idea
that the nonbenders were truly second class citizens. Korra’s last villain, however,
succeeded in establishing a government.
The final antagonist, Kuvira, comes into power after Zaheer disposes of the Earth
Queen and is captured. She is made the temporary leader of Ba Sing Se by the world
leaders after brings order to the city. She eventually attempts to reunite all of the Earth
Kingdom under her rule as The Great Unifier, a task that she eventually succeeds in. It is
difficult to define Kuvira because her ideology could be considered both fascism and
National Socialism, which is a more extreme version of fascism. To make things even
more difficult, she begins her rule as something more akin to a socialist. The rise of the
Earth Empire is very similar to the rise of Nazi Germany. Kuvira took a war-wrecked
nation and raised it on the ideology of fierce nationalism. While some towns and cities
joined her willingly, she would force others to become part of her nation. Her rationality
is that the Earth Empire must stay together as the best nation. Non-native Earth Empire
citizens and native citizens that opposed her were forced to work in camps and attend
reeducation camps. Her goal is to regain the former glory of the Earth Empire, even
attacking other nations that were on lands that used to be part of the Earth Kingdom

21. during Avatar: The Last Airbender. Race is very difficult to define in this world, but
each nation has very distinct racial features. As she becomes more radical and secure in
her position, she makes a very distinct differentiation between ethnically Earth Empire
citizens and non-ethnic citizens. She transforms as a leader. What is counter-hegemonic
about her portrayal is that just like with other antagonists in The Legend of Korra, she is
not viewed as a simply a villain. By having her speak truths, her ideology is validated
somewhat. In her speech during the episode “The Coronation” she exclaimed
I learned that the idea of a royal family passing a title from one generation
to the next was archaic, and that technology and innovation should be
what drives a nation forward. It was the pathetic rule of kings and queens
that caused the Earth Kingdom to descend into such incredible disarray.
It's taken me three years to get it back on track, and there is no way I will
allow it to slip back into the dark ages. I'd like to make an announcement
to the world: the Earth Kingdom is no more.
Her statements were true. The monarchs of the Earth Kingdom were either incompetent
or cruel in nature. Wu, the prince who was about to be crowned when she interrupted
him, was at the time pampered and inept. Everybody, including Korra, recognized that
the prince would have made an awful leader and that Kuvira had single handily brought
the Earth people back from ruin. Even if she eventually came in direct opposition with
Korra and Republic City and her forceful tactics deemed cruel, the writers did not make
her a one-dimension character nor did they totally dismiss her ideology. By making her a
righteous savior with legitimate concerns about and love for her home country, her belief
system that centers on nationalism and collectivism are allowed to be just as valid as
American ideologies.

22. The Will of the People
The United States is technically a “constitution-based federal republic [with a]
strong democratic tradition” (The World Factbook). This basically means that while the
people can choose others who will vote for their wants and needs, the concerns and safety
of those in the minority are considered despite what the majority may decide. The
primary rules of the government are determined by a constitution. In a pure democracy,
those in the minority of any given situation have very little, if any, protection against the
will of the majority. For this section, I am including institutions in which the general
population have the ability to peacefully elect their leader(s). This is different from a
society where the majority of their people may adore the leader(s), but ultimately do not
have the ability to decide when and if they leave office. In Adventure Time, societies
with this type of government are for the most part non-existent or frowned upon. The one
time that there was an election in the Candy Kingdom, it was proven that the people were
not smart enough to choose their own leader correctly. In the episode “Hot Diggity
Doom” Peppermint Butler told Princess Bubblegum that, “…I feel that you must
campaign. The candy people are real dumb”. She then responds, “This dumb election.
It's...barely even legal…And even being legal, I mean, I made everyone. I made their
homes. The candy people are mercurial, but they're not dillweeds”. The general sentiment
by most of the main characters is that the people should not have the power to decide
their leader and this is validated when the King of Oo, the winner of the election, is
shown to be both incompetent and selfish. The people were swayed by a campaign that
was a mix of praising the candy people and insulting the princess, something very similar
to American politics. Liberalism and democracy are a burden and ultimately harm the
people in Adventure Time. The only other example in which any form of democracy is

23. shown to exist is in the episode “Paper Pete”. In this episode Mildwin corrects Finn by
saying, “I'm not a king; I was democratically elected”. Finn quickly dismisses this by
calling that adorable. Not much is really known about how his people elect officials or
make laws, but they are the main antagonists for most of the episode until Finn brokers a
peace agreement between them and the Pagelings. For Finn, the protagonist of the show,
not only is a monarch the automatically assumed form of government, but also
democracy is just a novelty form of government that is not taken seriously. The Legend
of Korra has a more positive look on the democratic system though.
In The Legend of Korra there are many forms of democracy. The Southern Water
Tribe elects their chief. The United Republic of Nations, which was created at some
point between Avatar The Last Airbender and Legend of Korra, used to be a republic that
was governed by officials from the four nations. This however was eventually shown to
be a problem similar to ones that Americans had before The American Revolution.
Having the other nations govern the state, especially with all the representatives being
benders, was seen is inappropriate and the council was disbanded then replaced with a
president that was elected by the people. As a candidate, he received generous funds
from one of the richest people in the Republic City, the capital of The United Republic of
Nations. While the democratic state tends to be seen as mostly positive, the audience is
shown Korra coming in direct conflict with bureaucracy and politics. When people
disapprove of Korra’s decision to keep the gate to the spirit world open, the president
banishes her from the city to appease the people. After Korra saved someone who almost
fell off of a bridge, the president said “So is this the deal now, we have a crisis every
other day because of you? I order you to leave this city, you’ve caused nothing but
trouble since you’ve arrived”. Instead of dealing with the changes of the city, he shifted

24. the blame onto Korra. However, after she defeated Zaheer, he welcomes the wheelchair
bound Korra back into the city. He remarked after she left though were “ With the world
getting more and more dangerous, we need the Avatar now more than ever. Who will
protect us while she’s in a wheelchair”. His position as an elected official meant that his
decisions were based partially in how he assumed the public wanted him to act. The
ideology of accountability is very present in the republic system as it applies to elected
officials. His electability was one of his main concerns, which clouded his judgment
some times, despite his best intentions and genuine love for his state. Just like with the
other political ideologies and systems of governments in the show, Legend of Korra
chooses to be as impartial as they can with their representation of democracy. It is left to
the audience to interpret their own beliefs about democracy.
Conclusion
In my opinion, it is impossible for a show to be completely impartial or counter-
hegemonic when it is presented on a major television channel. No matter what the
creators may try to present, the bottom line for the companies that own the channels is
keeping their customers satisfied in order to create profit. However, the world that we
live in is connected due to technology and international affairs. As America embraces
different ways of thinking, the shows that are presented to the youth will imitate that
progression. Animated television has the benefit of being distinctly separate from reality
in a way that live action shows do not. Thus, they are allowed to push what is allowed to
be shown more than live action shows. The variety that this freedom provides give
children the option to explore different ideas and ways of existing, allowing them to
come to their own conclusion about the world they live in and the government and
ideologies that surround them as American citizens. Two of the core ideologies that

25. define the American way are freedom and individualism. Both of these require options to
choose from. One cannot be truly free or an individual if they are only given one choice. I
can think of nothing more American than allowing children to see the both the positives
and negatives of many different ways of living and thinking.
Works Cited
Althusser, Louis. Lenin and Philosophy, and Other Essays. New York: Monthly Review,
1972. Print.
Banet-Weiser, Sarah. Kids Rule!: Nickelodeon and Consumer Citizenship. Durham: Duke
UP, 2007. Print.
"Charting a Course into the Digital Era." (1994): I-161. Web.
"Country Comparison to the World." Central Intelligence Agency. Central Intelligence
Agency, n.d. Web. 17 Dec. 2015.
Geraghty, Lincoln. "Drawn to Television: American Animated Sf Series of the 1980s."
Science Fiction Film & Television 3.2 (2010): 287-300. Project MUSE [Johns
Hopkins UP]. Web. 17 Dec. 2015.
Konietzko, Bryan. Avatar The Last Airbender. Dir. Michael Dante DiMartino.
Nickelodeon. N.d. Television.

26. Konietzko, Bryan. The Legend of Korra. Dir. Michael Dante DiMartino. Nickelodeon.
N.d. Television.
Stabile, Carol A., and Mark Harrison. Prime Time Animation: Television Animation and
American Culture. London: Routledge, 2003. Print.
Ward, Pendleton, and Larry Leichliter, dirs. "Adventure Time. Cartoon Network. N.d.
Television.
Wells, Paul. Animation and America. New Brunswick N.J.: Rutgers U, 2002. Print.