cross-posted from: https://lemmit.online/post/1736886
This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/simpsonsshitposting by /u/maninplainview on 2023-12-25 08:28:44.
You must log in or # to comment.
People who say “keep politics out of” anything are usually stupid. Most things are political. Implicitly supporting the status quo is political. Leaving things unsaid is political.
Usually the people who pop out that line mean “keep politics that are different than mine out of”.
But on topic, punk is extremely political. For example, please review these lyrics from The Clash “Know Your Rights”, 1982
You have the right not to be killed
Murder Is a crime!
Unless it was done
By a policeman or an aristocratNo, most things aren’t political. But punk isn’t one of them.
Care to name some media that’s about people that has no political dimension?
For example, if a story has only white people or a story has non-white people, that’s a political dimension to the story. “Political” doesn’t only mean waving a flag.
A story about rescuing a princess from a castle has a political dimension. Super Mario Brothers isn’t what most people think of as a “political” game, but that’s there. It’s saying monarchy is okay, and unremarkably so as it doesn’t really spend any time on it. That’s not even touching the gender role stuff.
A story about a boy pursuing a girl is rife with political subtext. Why is he pursuing instead of her? Why not an arranged marriage? Why not gay? When does No mean No? All of that stuff is there, whether you like it or not. It might not be noticeable if it’s the dominant paradigm, but it’s still there.
Someone might say “Well you’re just reading into things!”. Unfortunately for them, that’s like the entirety of literary analysis. Additionally, the author’s intent is one tiny sliver of what’s important, if it matters at all.
Finding a political dimension in, like, lyric-less chiptune music might be more challenging, but most stuff that involves people has a political aspect to it.
Chiptune music is made by trans folks. So, very much political.
On one hand there probably are a lot of non political things. On the other hand, once you’ve been involved exclusively into non political things for long enough you may find yourself in a very bad situation politically. Like being governed by arseholes that don’t give a damn about you or human rights but everyone thinks that they somehow represent you
Politics (from Ancient Greek πολιτικά (politiká) ‘affairs of the cities’) is the set of activities that are associated with making decisions in groups, or other forms of power relations among individuals, such as the distribution of resources or status.
That covers literally anything involving a group of people doing things.
I’d go a step further and say “punk” is by definition political, and more specifically anti-authoritarian and non-conformist.
That said, this is a relatively new usage of the word. 100 years ago it meant nothing of the sort.
You’re right. Apoliticism enables fascism, and should therefore be treated as a fascist dogwhistle
Usually the people who pop out that line mean “keep politics that are different than mine out of”.
Really depends imo. A lot of political discourse naturally falls onto the same tracks towards the same repeated talking points, automatically making the worst assumptions about what people mean, being very defensive and suspicious (or even straight hateful) of anyone not proactively signalling being part of the same group. It’s important to face it and deal with it but you may want to take muddy boots off before you come in the house.
Punk is (was) almost nothing BUT politics.
Woosh moment?
No, they’re just validating the post
Being factual. Call it wooshy if you like. Doesn’t bother me.
I love playing whoosh a lot anyway for comedy porpoises.
Those dolphins always crack me up.
Swoosh
A few years ago when Trump was still in office my wife and I went to see Roger Waters in Tulsa, Oklahoma. We had 7th row seats that cost a few hundred apiece, but we had looked at getting seats in rows 1-3 but passed because they were $1,600.00 each.
Well come the night and Roger is putting on a fabulous show, but Jesus Christ he is laying into Trump hard the whole time with anti-trump videos running and pig drones flying around the room. It was awesome, you can find most of the show on YouTube if you’re interested.
Well six or eight cowboys in the first row walked out of the show, flipping off Roger Waters as they did so, yelling MAGA shit and screaming about what a dumbass Waters is and how he should keep politics out of his music…
Everyone is laughing their asses off because God DAMN, have you never read the lyrics to Pink Floyd songs? I mean, what the holy fuck.
Today I learned that Roger Waters is absolutely based. Glad to see it!
He is ABSOLUTELY not based. Look into the garbage he says about Ukraine and Russia.
From the first article I found on the matter:
The musician was invited by Russia to address the UN Security Council.
He called for a ceasefire and condemned Russia’s “illegal” invasion, but also denounced “provocateurs” in the West who he claimed were responsible.
Ukrainian ambassador Sergiy Kyslytsya called Waters’ speech “another brick in the wall” of Russian disinformation.
Yeah, either he got played or got paid, I think. But well, the people in media are not somehow godlike and not guaranteed to be correct always. If anything, that would be a cognitive bias to think so
I don’t see anything wrong with what he said. He does condemn russias actions
Yeah, but trying to play off Putin as some kind of inevitable result of western media is horse shit. He’s been anti-any-establishment for so long he’s lost perspective.
Holy shit, who did they think they were going to see perform?
Reminds me of that guy on twitter told Tom Morello that he had no business getting all political and to just stick to making music.
I think it’s wild that he’s more qualified than most politicians (BA in political science from Harvard in case anyone doesn’t know) to speak about politics but politicians want him to keep the politics out of his music.
They want him to stay out of it because he knows what they’re doing.
What machine did you think he was raging againsf, sir? The washing machine?
A printer, obviously. And I bet it was a HP, too.
Those are indeed the ragiest of rage machines.
Fuck you, I won’t do what you tell me.
THOSE WHO’VE DIED, ARE JUSTIFIED, FOR WEARIN THE BADGE THEY’RE THE CHOSEN WHITES
Smh my head, I can’t believe Rage Against the Machine went political.
UNH!
god shave the queen
And her fascist reghime
I loved it when she died that song went into the charts.
Oof, I got shome bad newsh for ya
I mean, it’s possible to like bands but not buy into their ideologies. I love Propagandhi but don’t agree with all of their positions. Pretending that they don’t have those positions so you never have to interrogate your own positions is the essence of being a poser though.
True, but if politics are deeply baked into a genre it is part of the genre. Post 9/11 country is pretty right wing, I accept that, if I’m listening to it I accept I’ll get right wing content unless I seek out left wing country. Similarly if I’m listening to Appalachian folk music of the early-mid 20th Century It’s gonna be communist as all hell. It was a genre defined in part by its association with a location and time and the politics within it, namely being extremely pro unionization.
Punk is similar but it broke containment. Punk is deeply tied to anarchism and antifascism. There are punk musicians, including famous and foundational ones who aren’t, like the Sex Pistols, but the by the time the genre had solidified anarchism ran in its veins. If I go to a random punk show I expect far left, anti bigotry, anti authoritarian themes in the same way I expect themes of romance and desire at a pop show. It isn’t necessary to keep and it certainly doesn’t need to be in every song, but it’s expected and it’s inversion will be something notable.
any mid century appelachian folk recs? im staunchly pro union, sounds like my jam
Pete Seeger is the iconic one for good reason
Not Appalachian, but Woody Guthrie and Leadbelly are both excellent. Smithsonian Folkways has collected hours and hours of their recordings.
And look up the Bristol Sessions.
I mean, it’s possible to like bands but not buy into their ideologies.
I would think that’s pretty rare, except from people who absolutely do not pay attention to the lyrics or do not know how to interpret their meaning.
Propagandhi is actually a good example of a band that has some stances that you may not adhere to, but still find enjoyment in the spirit of the lyrics.
I can wave the black and red flag with them, while still eating meat and not liking hockey.
I never really considered veganism a political view… But I do like Morrissey, even though I also like meat. However, I’m not really into Meat is Murder specifically. I don’t agree with the lyrics and it’s not that great musically either 🤷🏻♂️
However, veganism isn’t really a harmful ideology, either. I can disagree with them and still respect them. It’s much harder (for me, impossible) to respect a white supremacist or other harmful/hateful groups. I have heard plenty of country songs that definitely have that kind of views embedded in it. Fuck those bands.
I should maybe clarify - I don’t find their veganism to be problematic. I just mean that I can sing along to songs like ‘meat is still murder’ without agreeing with that specific bit. But then the song ‘nation states’ comes on and I’m back to walking hand in hand with them waving an anarchy flag.
I never really considered veganism a political view…
[Edit to add: >I never really considered veganism a political view… I don’t necessarily consider it a political view. But it is a moral view, and the places where morals bump up against each other is the political part. To me.]
So you don’t think that killing an innocent for pleasure is murder?
I told myself I wouldn’t block you the last time I interacted with you. And that I would instead use you for entertainment. I must admit that your specific brand of cosplaying someone with mental issues has been quite fun to watch. But now I tire of it.
New year, new rules. Goodbye.
I hope not. I really enjoy immersing myself in political spheres I don’t necessarily agree with just to see what makes them tick, it’s really interesting to me and humanizes people I might otherwise hate as a matter of principle. Music turns out to be a really easy way to do this.
I can’t imagine I’m the only one, though it’s definitely not something I often see online.
I love classical music, but am not very religious. I’m guessing this situation, at least, is somewhat common.
Yeah and gospel music is a more extreme version of that. The religious elements can make me uncomfortable at times, but fuck if it isn’t good music.
I love the flute solos by Adolf H. Classic. Never looked into the guy.
It’s called cognitive dissonance, when a person holds two conflicting ideas or beliefs. It’s stressful to acknowledge the conflict and change beliefs and behaviours, so people instead do mental gymnastics to justify holding both.
Mental gymnastics = very painful for anyone but participating in the sport
Cognitive dissonance is actually the state of holding conflicting feelings, beliefs, and actions, and it’s supposed to be stressful. Changing beliefs or actions relieves stress.
The funny thing about art is that people can interpret it however they want, even in the most stupid ways. See the many idiots that thought/think Rage Against the Machine and Pink Floyd weren’t political.
It’s almost like
GOD SAVE THE QUEEN (AND HER FASCIST REGIME)
never happened.Lol, without politics punk is just playing badly.
Good for him.
Realest punk: I am a poser and I don’t care
Maybe I’m wrong, but I’ve always looked at punk (the music, not the ideology) as a thing that was, not is. Similar to classic rock. As in… there are no new classic rock bands. No one says, “hey. I’m forming a classic rock back and we’re writing all new material!”
Punk was The Ramones, The Dammed, The Sex Pistols. Black Flag, The Clash, Dead Kennedys, etc.
Just like how classic rock was Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, BOC, Rolling Stones, The Beatles, etc.
Again, many will probably disagree, but this is simply an opinion on the matter.
There’s very much still new punk, but it’s old enough that what you described probably should be thought of as classic punk. It’s evolved, grown, changed, and split. You’ve got plenty of bands still screaming similar to the old school stuff, but you’ve also got stuff like against me, rage against the machine (yeah it’s rap punk), and my mind is blanking on other modern well known punk bands, but then you’ve got punk descended genres that are still punk like folk punk and riot grrl as well as genres like goth and emo
I think it’s better compared to metal. It’s an offshoot of rock that branched, evolved, and stuck around with a certain type of people
I mean, you can have whatever opinion you want but this one in particular isn’t very helpful. Lots of new bands call themselves or are called punk.
https://bandcamp.com/discover/punk
Are you going to tell them they’re doing it wrong?
You could make an argument that there is “classic punk” like “classic rock”, and maybe people would know what you meant, but that’s not really the language as it is spoken today.
Did you actually listen to any of the bands from the bandcamp link? A lot of them could not be called punk by any stretch of the imagination, but more genre tags mean a higher chance for listens.
Some extra confusion comes from the fact that “punk” doubles as the name of a movement (or perhaps an attitude) and any style of vaguely ramones-derived music. Most of the time, it’s used as no more than a nice buzzword that simply means “attitude” in a very vague sense. To exemplify, “Noone is as punk as Celine Dion!” is a sentence that both makes perfect sense (you understand what is meant) and is complete nonsense at the same time. The words “dubstep” or “zydeco” cannot be used in the same way.
Are you going to tell them they’re doing it wrong?
To be clear, is your argument that the term “punk” is completely devoid of meaning and if someone calls their music punk, it must be? That’s really not helpful at all.
My argument is there are contemporary bands that call themselves punk and are called punk by others. There are subgenres like pop punk to further clarify. One could be a cliché pedant and say like “pop punk isn’t punk” but that was an eyeroller when 30 years ago when the argument was new.
You said “a lot of them” on the search link can’t be called punk. But then some of them presumably can be. So then new punk bands exist.
Calling one’s self a punk band doesn’t make it a punk band. And again, find me a band on bandcamp that describes themselves as a classic rock back writing new material.
Why do you accept “classic rock” exists alongside “rock” but not “classic punk” alongside “punk”?
Also here’s crobot. They’re tagged as classic rock: https://crobot.bandcamp.com/album/feel-this .They do a great live show
I sense “no true Scotsman” coming, though.
Because no one calls it “classic punk.” Greed Day and Black Flag are NOT the same type of music.
Green Day is typically called pop punk. Subgenres and other categorization tools exist for good reason.
If you want to start calling things “classic punk” go ahead. People will probably know what you mean. But to be like “sorry you can’t be punk in 2023” is shitty gatekeeping.
Edit: not going to acknowledge crobot?
No.
Why not?
Punk IS not was, it always has been and always will be.
So classic rock IS, as well?
Only if you want to start circumcising mosquitos here.
Classical as a word typically refers to the period of time the Greeks were at their height.
Classical Rock uses the spirit of the word Classical to describe this era of rock and roll as the basis for modern Rock and Roll.
Now if you want to use the term classical rock to describe an era, then no that era is gone. If you want to decide that only the period of the 70s and early 80s that punk was as you describe it then SURE punk is dead.
But punk started before the 70s and will continue long after you and I are dead.
By the arbitrary definition that punk was a genre of rock music that existed only during a certain time period… sure it was and no longer is.
I simply champion the idea that labeling punk as a genre is ironic in and of itself, to say it fits in a narrow definition is also kinda ironic.
Yeah, and new bands get added every year as time marches on. Your initial comment is insane though. Country, metal, electronica, they all continue on, but punk has died…? That’s not how music works at all. Punk is still happening every day. From the classics you mentioned, to some shitty band who only formed last week and are still thrashing out their first song in their parents garage, it’s all out there. Plenty of ways to find it too. Speciality punk record labels and record stores, punk venues, plenty of playlists to be found.
You’re not getting my point. Classic rock wasn’t called classic rock when it was new. No one in the 70’s were calling Pink Floyd a classic rock band. They were just a rock band.
Punk (music) was a thing that happened, not a thing that IS happening.
Rock music sis still created though… You’re basically saying “70s rock could only happen in the 70s so therefore punk doesn’t exist anymore”. The “70s rock” part of that sentence isn’t even true, let alone the jump from it to the back half.
Exactly! And they’re constantly adding new songs to the canon! Hell, they’ve added some nirvana and foo fighters tracks!
No, what I’m saying is that in the 70’s, what we know now as “classic rock” was simply called “rock” music. I thought I explained this pretty well already.
Similarly, in the 70’s punk was called punk. What we have now that is calling itself punk- in my opinion, can’t be punk. Because punk WAS. Like how classic rock WAS.
There are no NEW classic rock bands. Ergo, there are no new punk bands.
Then be clearer. You asked if classic rock is a thing. And I answered that, it still is a thing with new songs added every year. And I say again, your initial comment about punk music is insane. I made it pretty fucking clear about how it is still a genre that is still happening to this day. You ignoring that doesn’t discount what I wrote.
And I said in my original comment that this is my opinion. I’m not going to apologize because it bothers you. If you don’t like it or agree, you’re free to move along. No one is forcing you to debate this.
Nah, you literally posted on a forum. The whole point is to drive conversation. If you don’t like being called out for saying idiotic things, then don’t post. Don’t try and turn this around and say that this is some sort of failing on my behalf. And yeah you have an opinion, but it’s a prejudiced opinion. Ie. one without just grounds or sufficient knowledge. That means it’s not a well founded one. And opinions like that have been called out since language was formed, bit late to start crying about it happening now.
Wouldn’t that be classic punk then?
Yes, but they won’t release new music, because then it wouldn’t be classic anymore.
Same with punk. Now you get it.
Rock
punk
classic rock
classic punk
Hmmm classic punk huh. I feel like the genre and sound has changed so much, but I’m still amazed that the identity has kept in tact. Truly a masterpiece of sounds and art 😄
KEEP OPINIONS OUT OF EXPLICITLY OPINION-FOCUSED SOCIAL MEDIA SITES
My mistake. Should have realized who posts here and known better. This isn’t a place to share opinions.
My dude are you mad because you shared your opinion and people were like “nah man that doesn’t make sense”? So like you can share your opinion but don’t want anyone to respond with theirs?
Sounds like you’re not looking for a forum. You’re looking for a diary.
lol? Am I mad? Look at all the butthurt kids whining about how my opinion is wrong to them. They’re asking questions, I’m answering them. And you’re accusing me of being mad for doing so?
Fucking hilarious! Grow up.
You seem pretty mad. In the other branch of this post you were like “No one calls themselves classic rock anymore”. I linked you one I knew off the top of my head and you just ignored it. I asked if you were going to acknowledge it and you just said “No”
Maybe you’re not mad (you seem mad) but you’re not really engaging in good faith.
Poser alert!
I’m 51 years old, you clown. I remember these bands when most of them were still touring- and was at a Pink Floyd show as a child back in 81’. I have MANY first edition vinyls from a lot of them as well.
The fact that you came out missing so hard on such a big swing- shows how much you’ve yet to learn about talking to people you know nothing about.
Exactly what a poser would say 😎
Yeah, I looked at your comment history. You’ve one to talk kid.
Aw shucks, you noticed me :3
You need to look in the right places. First off check out the band soft play from the UK. They’re definitely a good larger example of modern punk. Apart from that, any city with a proper local music scene is going to have a few punk bands. Austin and Chicago come to mind.
You’re missing my point entirely.
No one says, “hey. I’m forming a classic rock back and we’re writing all new material!”
Sure, but I bet a lot of young talent are saying “hey we’re forming a rock band and that girl/guy in the corner over there writes kickass lyrics.”
After that they either fail and few ever hear them play, or they succeed and a new band is born. Maybe they even eventually end up becoming legends of their own. It doesn’t happen often, but it does happen.
Now rock and punk isn’t my jam so much, because I like mellow electronic stuff, but I know of one such band that I found when COVID hit and they’re just now beginning to really break through. It’s fucking beautiful when a band finds that essence that truly defines them.
I’m not really sure what part of your comment was an opinion, but “people don’t start punk bands anymore” is simply not true. There’s plenty of new punk acts out there, the genre didn’t just come to an abrupt halt in 1990. Just off the top of my head is IDLES and The Chats, but you can find tons of recent bands if you look.
You’re getting downvoted to hell here, but you’re completely right. Punk was a cultural moment that was alive and relevant from the late 70s to early 80s, a kind of nihilistic tabula rasa that was codified into a “genre” after the fact. All of the original punk bands sounded different from each other, then from the early 80s onwards all new punk bands sounded the same. Bands like Green Day and Rancid were probably the last nail in the coffin.
The spirit of what punk was lives on here and there in other expressions, but is rarely labeled as “punk”. If a band calls themselves punk rock today, they’re either doing some kind of museological work or they’re working for someone trying to sell you leather jackets. (HC should probably be considered as a separate movement altogether.)
Yeah, nah. There was a doco series like 4yrs ago. Ended with Henry Rollins going “everyone sys punk’s dead. It’s not. It’s still out there. It’s playing for a warm beer for each band member at some club. It’s playing some kids basement show” and as much as I don’t always agree with the guy, he’s not wrong… Like, I could rattle off 5 new punk bands to me this year. Could do more if I sat down and went through what I listened to, but those 5 stood out over an onslaught of electronica, metal, indie, etc. If you think the youth of today isn’t just as disaffected as the youth of the 70s, I have a bridge to sell you…
If you think the youth of today isn’t just as disaffected as the youth of the 70s, I have a bridge to sell you…
No one is saying that, they’re probably a lot more disaffected as a whole. That’s not to say they as a group are turning to a 45+ year old subculture to alleviate their disaffection. I could rattle off a few new dixieland acts as well, that doesn’t mean dixieland is currently a living, vibrant art form. There’s always going to be reenactors and there’s nothing wrong with that per se.
Punk has never been more alive than it is now. Political discord is where it thrives. And if you don’t think the current political climate is discordant… Well… Like, fuck. Yeah, what many would consider modern punk is very far removed from what was made in the 70s. But there’s still kids making that punk and its still being made in general. Just look on Bandcamp, there’s enough new punk every day on there to drown any mortal. But no, it’s easier to be an idiot…
Nobody’s arguing there isn’t music that calls itself punk being made today. This isn’t going anywhere…have a nice evening.
You literally are… Thanks for admitting punks not dead and it’s still being created every day and is flipping it’s middle finger at you though. Cos. Fuck. You. And report me, what ever. I found punk decades ago, and people like you just want to split and divide us, never understand us… Mainly cos you’re weak…
You literally know nothing about me and are insulting a strawman of your own making. I don’t care and you shouldn’t either. Sincerely, have a nice evening.
I appreciate the reply. And might I ask if you also find it ironic that in disagreeing with the “punk” label, I’m being hive-mind downvoted by those defending the ideology and nomenclature of a movement that would stand against such behavior?
It’s almost as if these kids don’t get it. Which kind of makes my point for me.
You’re trying to gatekeep people out of punk. Lots of people in punk scenes of any time period would give you shit for that.
And sometimes if most people are disagreeing with you, it might be because you’re wrong and not a “hive mind”
Nah, this isn’t irony. Punk has always stood against misinformation. You would’ve been downvoted even harder back in the day.
