Why aren't musicians striking?

[Lance Bunyon]

I read part of an interview with Vernon Reid today.
He says AI will make composers singers and musicians obsolete.

 

[MrLenny1]

We have no work so how can we strike.

 

[31HZ]

There's nothing left to strike for.

We're 25 years too late.

 

[Lance Bunyon]

The reason unions became prominent in the early part of the 20th century is that the robber barons had gotten out of control regarding how little they would pay.
People fought back. It formalized into unions.
The point of organization was solidarity.
If 10 bands go on strike and 10 don't, the clubs will just hire the scabs and the pay will actually go DOWN.
Another observation, the clubs don't need us. They have endless entertainment options.
Why don't we strike? We have no solidarity.
We have no bargaining power.
We're currently begging for jobs that basically don't exist anymore.
Sorry to be the bearer of truth.

 

[Boneless]

Why? I see zero point in licensing musicians any more than I see a point in licensing a watercolor painter. There’s no compelling societal concern since it doesn’t affect public health or safety. Licensing requirements are created for actual reasons, not just as something nice to have. You can’t just legally regulate something for no reason. At least not in this country.

Still, actors and screenwriters have some sort of a guild.

 

[Lance Bunyon]

Still, actors and screenwriters have some sort of a guild.

Because they're not quite at the point of completely replacing them with computer chips samples and AI like is actually the case now with musicians.
Sorry bout the syntax, first cuppa.

 

[buldog5151bass]

There's nothing left to strike for.

We're 25 years too late.

About 65.

 

[Boneless]

Should do? Let’s get real. People do what they’re going to do. Sometimes within a system, sometimes outside or despite it. A system is no guarantee of individual behavior.



That’s overly simplistic since there have been few if any examples of pure capitalism at work anywhere, except in situations where societal norms have completely broken down. Profiteering in a war zone ot in a country in the grips of hyperinflation being two examples of “free market” capitalism.



Nonsense. Unrestrained and unrestricted self interest inevitably leads to societal collapse. The very framework that allows for capitalist economies to exist.

Of course, I was simplifying. But the gist is still that the individual is essentially encouraged to care about their own bottom line and at most individuals are socially pressured into giving (eg. charity, tipping, helping out family members) but that doesn't really work that well. Demonstrably so.

Why not? I’ve seen many people without a personal interest at stake step into a conflict on behalf of someone else because their moral compass directed them to.

Because morality only works so well, and it's also hit and miss. People are arbitrarily and conditionally helped out. And this is not a good thing.

I don’t want nor have I asked for anything, so I don’t get whatever argument you’re trying to make with the above. Or how we got to Spartacus and heroes since we’re discussing unions and strikes. But if you feel you’ve made a point tossing in a false equivalency I suppose that’s fine too.

(note: Union workers are not slaves in any sense of either term despite their leadership sometimes equating them with slaves for dramatic effect when speaking to the press.)

It's not a false equivalence, it is only so if you reject the idea that workers are at the wrong end of the stick.

Ok again. But I also don’t recall saying anything about any person or groups political orientation, which to me is immaterial for purposes of this discussion. Your point?

Everything is political. You may choose not to speak about stuff in political terms, but at the end of the day, it still is.

I said much the same earlier about the ultimately self defeating nature of unrestrained self interest.




Huh? That’s a pretty unusual interpretation of what individualist stands for in relationship to collectivism. Collectivism denies the intrinsic value of “each individual” except insofar as that individual is part of the greater collective. And the collective has no moral issue at all with sacrificing one or more individuals for what it considers the greater intrinsic worth of the collective. That’s about as far away from individualism as you can get.

Which is why socialism is not about the collective, it's about collective action. But you know, I actually don't think everybody must be socialist or whatever. (There are different world views and that's fine). Even within the context of "managed capitalism" which is what we have in the West, acting as a whole is in the individuals' interest, because the single musician isn't going to make a difference.

Because they're not quite at the point of completely replacing them with computer chips samples and AI like is actually the case now with musicians.
Sorry bout the syntax, first cuppa.

This may (may!) be true today. (I'm not convinced). What about twenty years ago? Or forty? There has never been a musician's guild. And I'm still convinced that if the whole industry just stopped performing eventually the establishment would cave in.

 

[40Hz]

Still, actors and screenwriters have some sort of a guild.

Musicians already have trade unions.

 

[Boneless]

Musicians already have trade unions.

No, they don't. Only classical musicians do, perhaps.

 

[Lance Bunyon]

Of course, I was simplifying. But the gist is still that the individual is essentially encouraged to care about their own bottom line and at most individuals are socially pressured into giving (eg. charity, tipping, helping out family members) but that doesn't really work that well. Demonstrably so.



Because morality only works so well, and it's also hit and miss. People are arbitrarily and conditionally helped out. And this is not a good thing.



It's not a false equivalence, it is only so if you reject the idea that workers are at the wrong end of the stick.




Everything is political. You may choose not to speak about stuff in political terms, but at the end of the day, it still is.



Which is why socialism is not about the collective, it's about collective action. But you know, I actually don't think everybody must be socialist or whatever. (There are different world views and that's fine). Even within the context of "managed capitalism" which is what we have in the West, acting as a whole is in the individuals' interest, because the single musician isn't going to make a difference.



This may (may!) be true today. (I'm not convinced). What about twenty years ago? Or forty? There has never been a musician's guild. And I'm still convinced that if the whole industry just stopped performing eventually the establishment would cave in.

There have been plenty of Musicians Guilds, read up. This is only the North American history:
American Federation of Musicians - Wikipedia.

 

[Michedelic]

For the record…this is from the AFM North America monthly periodical, International Musician:
AFM Musicians Stand with Striking WGA Writers | International Musician

Then, a viewpoint on the threat of AI…
Look Out – It’s Already Here | International Musician

An article on the situation of the less than ‘rich and famous’ contingent of actors…
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

This also trickles down to tech and crew people, like my cousin-in-law, who does props and set dressing. AI will certainly affect her job eventually.

How secure is yours?

 

[amper]

Ultimately, the Hollywood writers strike is futile, for three very simple reasons: no one is entitled to employment; no one is obligated to hire; and the use of so-called AI by studios does not in any way preclude the writers the studios have hired in the past from banding together to create their own studios, productions, and distribution outlets.

I don't make the rules. That's just what it means to live in a free society. There is no ethical way to stop the advancement of technology.

Even arguments about intellectual property rights won't be of much use, because there's no way to limit what data is and is not available to feed the databases. There's no ethical way to stop someone from legitimately purchasing a text and reading it.

If I buy your book, there's no ethical way for you to stop me placing it in front of a camera and scanning it, any more than you can stop me from scanning it with my cranial meatballs, so long as I do not reproduce the text and distribute it.

 

[buldog5151bass]

You miss the point. If labor is wanted enough by management, the strike will be effective. Simple as that.

 

[definenredefine]

Ultimately, the Hollywood writers strike is futile, for three very simple reasons: no one is entitled to employment; no one is obligated to hire;

No one is entitled to anyone else's labor, either.

and the use of so-called AI by studios does not in any way preclude the writers the studios have hired in the past from banding together to create their own studios, productions, and distribution outlets.

...but lack of resources does.

 

[LBS-bass]

You need an effective union to mount a strike. We don’t have one. Nobody really cares much if we don’t make music.

 

[amper]

No one is entitled to anyone else's labor, either.

No, no one is entitled to anyone else's labor, of course not. That's a basic principle of freedom. What point was it that you thought you were making?

...but lack of resources does.

Lack of resources? You are talking about a group of some of the most highly-compensated professionals in our society. The idea that they lack the resources to compete in the market isn't a sensible suggestion.

 

[Killing Floor]

Because too many musicians know how much business a lot of bars would gain. There’d be no turning back. Only ones to hurt would be musicians. Only ones to gain would be club owners. Larger symphonies and theatre productions would maintain status quo, theatres would instantly plug in recorded soundtracks and orchestras often have a limited schedule that could easily be postponed and rescheduled since that audience is steady.

Also, there’s a bear in the woods joke here.

 

[Hurricane Jimmie]

So Anyway, I joined a musician's local in the 70's after I was done with my first (basement) band. They put my name on a list which they mailed out every month or so. I was working within a month, but that was just blind luck.
A contract was required at some places that had a bartender or restaurant union. Those days are long gone. The union seemed powerless to enforce cancelled contracts and didn't have any pull with the local circuit. Book your own gigs, but make sure you have a contract, and if you need help, get your own lawyer. I don't think I've played with another union musician for 30 years.

At one AFM meeting, someone proposed a goon squad to go around and check on venues & bands to make sure there was a contract in place. I thought that was quite funny.

 

[amper]

AFM has never given the slightest fig about the plight of young rock musicians being exploited by small clubs and bars, so I don't give the slightest fig for AFM.