“Through the use of satire,King of the Hill presents whiteness as racial imagery while simultaneously providing critiques of white supremacy. While other satirical programs \u201ccritique\u201d racism solely through the use of overtly-prejudiced characters,King of the Hill targets the way whiteness functions as a whole. The program exposes the seemingly innocuous manifestations of whiteness, such as white guilt, performative tolerance, and the idea that racism exists only as individual acts of prejudice. The Hill family, their peers, and white viewers are satirized for their ignorance without being \u201clet off the hook\u201d for their internalized racism.” (p. 1)<\/p>\n
“Similar to how white viewers are comfortable distancing themselves from outwardly-racist characters, liberal, intellectual white viewers may feel comfortable distancing themselves from the \u201cwhite trash\u201d whiteness portrayed in King of the Hill.This reading of the show further cements the \u201cinvisibility\u201d of whiteness, but it instead deems \u201cliberal whiteness\u201d as the neutral, universal identity. White viewers should read the show as a critique of all whiteness instead of reading it as a critique of \u201cthat other kind of whiteness.\u201d (p. 7)<\/p>\n
“The show primarily depicts the operation of whiteness in the following ways: white performative guilt\/ sympathy, white belief in racism as individual prejudice, and white dependence on people of color for validation. The following sections will explore how each of these manifestations of whiteness function in the episodes \u201cWestie Side Story,\u201d \u201cTraffic Jam,\u201d and \u201cRacist Dawg.\u201d (p. 8)<\/p>\n