Music and Politics?

[Broadstbully22]

Maybe This is Rage Against the machine getting back together. lol.

My band is split, two republicans, two democrates. We just don't talk about it.

 

[onosson]

I know some people who I wouldn't want to play in a band with due to their political opinions. It's not so much that I disagree with them, but that they can't stop talking about it.

 

[marmadaddy]

My thoughts exactly..... Just because I am a fan of Your body of work (Film, Music, art), it doesn't mean I give one hill of beans about Your political views or convictions. I respect that You feel that way, but please keep it to Yourself.

...

I don't understand this. You seem to be saying that successful creative people shouldn't be allowed to express political opinions. Why should being good at something disqualify them being able to say what they think and believe? At what level of success should this kick in?

 

[curbowkid]

I don't understand this. You seem to be saying that successful creative people shouldn't be allowed to express political opinions. Why should being good at something disqualify them being able to say what they think and believe? At what level of success should this kick in?

Let's take this a step further and ask why they need to be successful for their opinion to matter more than the average persons?

 

[marmadaddy]

Let's take this a step further and ask why they need to be successful for their opinion to matter more than the average persons?

There are two ways to look at this:
1. The opinion of the famous person doesn't matter more than that of the average person. This does not warrant telling them to keep their opinions to themselves however. This is just as illogical as a famous person telling an "average" person the same thing because they're "average".

2. Fame is nothing more than one of the primary forms of currency (fame and fortune). How someone chooses to use said currency is up to them. If the fact that famous people are given a market in which to spend said currency bothers you then the onus is on you to go to a different market (change the channel, read a different newspaper). The answer is not to say "I'm not interested in what you have to say, so you shouldn't say anything."

 

[mellowinman]

Good politics in music- Bob Dylan, Pete Seeger, Woody Guthrie, and RATM making heartfelt songs with political/social themes that are earnest and true to their hearts.

Bad politics in music- Dixie Chicks dissing the President (even tho I agreed with them) in a foreign country, Ted Nugent on Bill O'Reilley, etc.

I disagree.

I think any time anyone expresses themselves honestly, it's a good thing. It's a natural part of the human condition, and whether I agree with you or not, you MIGHT cause me to think about something.

Alice Cooper is AGAINST politics in music. He has every right to feel that way.

John Lennon was ALL ABOUT politics in music. I loved that about him.

I am no less or more likely to listen to someone's music because I disagree with their views. Or to watch their movies, or TV shows, for that matter.

And I don't want anyone to feel like they need to shut their mouths.

It's all about the freedom, baby.

And as Jimi Hendrix famously said, "when the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

That was a groovy thing to say, man, and it's easy to dismiss it as "naive," but that doesn't make it any less thoughtful, and hopeful.

 

[Batmensch]

most musicians, especially rock stars, should STFU when it comes to politics. Since when does the best or luckiest musician actually know anything more about this stuff then the average person who foolishly believes they do. Ditto for actors....

Maybe they don't know any more than the average person (and I have my doubts about them, too) but everyone, including people in show biz have the same right to air their political views as anyone else. I find this attitude from people who say that performers (of any kind) should just STFU about political issues is elitism at it's worst.

 

[thomashawk]

Music and politics are inexorably tied - from classical to electronica. In two seconds, I can think of The Marriage of Figaro, RATM, Guthrie, Mingus, Lennon, Public Enemy, Dylan, Funkadelic. The expression of any true art must be effected by social and cosmic understanding - how one views oneself in the "larger."

 

[ducknturtle]

The one thing that bothers me is the widespread notion that you must be a liberal in order to be compassionate and "artistic". After that, I would say that dogmatic political stridency in music, from either end of the political spectrum, is annoying. I don't see how it can be a good thing to alienate one half of your potential audience.

 

[JMac- Wiskerface Designs]

I don't understand this. You seem to be saying that successful creative people shouldn't be allowed to express political opinions. Why should being good at something disqualify them being able to say what they think and believe? At what level of success should this kick in?

I honestly believe that everyone has a right to an opinion on anything, and can say whatever they like whenever they feel it is important, within the boundries of good taste. So I have no issue with anyone declaring their belief in something or how They feel. However, I find it rather silly that Celebs choose social media to feed Us their politcal beliefs or agenda.

Honestly, do You remember the last time that there was "breaking event" national news coverage with some Celeb telling Us about His/Her choices in footwear or breakfast cereal? Would You actually care? IMO- it should carry the same weight in real world value, as their opinion on social or politcal issues.

 

[thomashawk]

The one thing that bothers me is the widespread notion that you must be a liberal in order to be compassionate and "artistic". After that, I would say that dogmatic political stridency in music, from either end of the political spectrum, is annoying. I don't see how it can be a good thing to alienate one half of your potential audience.

It's funny; after I posted that I realized all my examples were of liberal artists. I would guess that conservatism, as a general concept, and by it's very nature is to "preserve what is established," and while it possible of course to express that sentiment, it certainly doesn't generate the same potential excitement as something new. My assumption is that it is difficult to be truly "original" when preserving the established.

I would agree that dogmatism from any direction is generally a bad thing - but not always. Looking at a current, and rock & roll example, are RATM and Ted Nugent alienating half their potential audience, or inspiring their actual audience?

 

[powderfinger]

There is so such thing as a "liberal" or "conservative". You cannot place millions of people neatly into these 2 categories, although the media does a great job of promoting this notion.

I know plenty of "liberals" who own guns, go to church, and are pro life.

I know plenty of "conservatives" who are pro choice, do not own guns, and are anti war.

 

[JimInRadfordVA]

Music and politics became eternally enmeshed when musicians discovered that fans cared what they thought and did outside of music. Politicians recognized this and use it to their advantage. This is how you get singers testifying before Congress on environmental issues. It's not because of some unusual experience or insight, it's because they bring votes and dollars.

 

[marmadaddy]

I honestly believe that everyone has a right to an opinion on anything, and can say whatever they like whenever they feel it is important, within the boundries of good taste. So I have no issue with anyone declaring their belief in something or how They feel. However, I find it rather silly that Celebs choose social media to feed Us their politcal beliefs or agenda.

Why is it silly for someone who's famous to use social media to express an opinion but not for someone who's relatively unknown?

What's the difference between "expressing an opinion" vs. "feeding a political belief or agenda".

Whatever weight is given to an opinion is up to the listener, not the speaker. I'm presented with the opportunity to take in useless information all of the time, but I recognize that it's up to me to not pay attention to it, it isn't up to other people to not make it available.

I understand what you're saying but if you think about fame like money, you might see that the people who have it have every right to spend it as they see fit. We may think there's something garish or wasteful about it, but it's theirs to spend.

 

[Gaius46]

Maybe This is Rage Against the machine getting back together. lol.

My band is split, two republicans, two democrates. We just don't talk about it.

We're 2 liberal guitarists, 1 slight right-of-center drummer and a libertarian bassist. We're also a meateating rhythm section and two vegetarian front-persons. Never been a problem and we do on occassion discuss politics.

If someone can't have a reasonable, friendly discussion about politics with bandmates and friends that says more about that person than anything else.

 

[BassBrass]

The one thing that bothers me is the widespread notion that you must be a liberal in order to be compassionate and "artistic".

In "Letters to a Young Poet" RM Rilke basically states that an "artist" is someone who has no choice other than to be an artist. I can relate to that strongly. (In my experience nothing is like making music and I must do it!) In order to do this you must give yourself permission to set out on an unknown, and maybe dangerous, path. Recent data suggests that a big psychological difference between liberals and conservatives, is that liberals are willing to take chances and can handle the chance that things will go wrong...on the basis of IDEALS, not surety. I know plenty of musicians who complain about their path, but when asked, I don't think Any of them would have preferred the life of a hedge fund manager Even though the hedge fund manager might make millions of dollars, in the end, they've created NOTHING while an artist literally creates the future. We call those people "breeders" because Maybe their child will actually do something valuable. Kim Deal was the bass player for the Breeders.

As to compassion...if you are capable of abstracting true human suffering into necessary life lessons I Don't Have To Go Through, or something THOSE PEOPLE experience somewhere else, please, I don't care what label you like to use...

 

[powderfinger]

We're 2 liberal guitarists, 1 slight right-of-center drummer and a libertarian bassist. We're also a meateating rhythm section and two vegetarian front-persons. Never been a problem and we do on occassion discuss politics.

If someone can't have a reasonable, friendly discussion about politics with bandmates and friends that says more about that person than anything else.

We had 2 guys in an old band of mine once. One was a Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, never had an original though in his life, close minded, mean spirted redneck... the other was a pinko commie socialist who thought the world should be an open borders and live as a commune... they butted heads. Frequently.

 

[powderfinger]

Music and politics became eternally enmeshed when musicians discovered that fans cared what they thought and did outside of music. Politicians recognized this and use it to their advantage. This is how you get singers testifying before Congress on environmental issues. It's not because of some unusual experience or insight, it's because they bring votes and dollars.

The only time Ive ever been impressed with musicians in politics, was when Frank Zappa and Dee Snyder testified before Congress in the 80s, re: the PRC or whatever it was called.

Oh, and for the record, the only celebrity who makes any sense onstage when singing or talking politics is Jello Biafra.

 

[JMac- Wiskerface Designs]

Why is it silly for someone who's famous to use social media to express an opinion but not for someone who's relatively unknown?

What's the difference between "expressing an opinion" vs. "feeding a political belief or agenda".

Whatever weight is given to an opinion is up to the listener, not the speaker. I'm presented with the opportunity to take in useless information all of the time, but I recognize that it's up to me to not pay attention to it, it isn't up to other people to not make it available.

I understand what you're saying but if you think about fame like money, you might see that the people who have it have every right to spend it as they see fit. We may think there's something garish or wasteful about it, but it's theirs to spend.

Thank You! Very well put, and very thought provoking for Me.

I will however counter, that what bothers Me the most about it all is how someone of higher means or social fortune's opinion should mean any more than the common "Guy on the street" on the grand scale of being controversial and having validity. After all, without "The common Man" or "Consumer" none of these people would be where they are today. Their "God given" talent or skill, is only a small peice of the pie.
I am sure, that I may come off as very "anti-hero" with My feelings on the matter. However, I think I'd feel better about it all if a countering view from the other side of the hill was offered at times.

Yes, I totally agree that a persons monetary or social blessings should be Their's to spend as They see fit, as They did what it took to aquire said wealth. With that being said, money doesn't allways buy good common sense, and sometimes tends to blur the view of the way that the world really is beyond the reaches of Your front lawn.

 

[thomashawk]

In "Letters to a Young Poet" RM Rilke basically states that an "artist" is someone who has no choice other than to be an artist. I can relate to that strongly. (In my experience nothing is like making music and I must do it!)

Shockingly, as a kid, one of the most insightful things I ever read (up to that point), was from Blackie Lawless of W.A.S.P. "The music business isn't looking for people that want to be involved; it's looking for people who must be involved." I later realized he probably got that from Rilke or James Joyce.