Quote:
Originally Posted by lorenzoduke
Actually I'd say - and keep in mind I do so from down here among the 'people', the wallowing silly ignorant pigs of fandom - that the problem we actually have is entertainer's selling out the goodwill they've earned from fans for producing music and entertainment in order to take a pious and patronising position of using said goodwill, fame and name in order to suggest to people which way to vote. Musicians are musicians and we like them for their music. A person using these things - of which their fanbase is certainly a part of building - to endorse a candidate one year and then say 'my political beliefs are none of your business' the next seems a little disingenuous. If someone wants to keep their political beliefs private, seems to me drawing attention to them in a hugely public way might be an ill advised move.
|
Yes, that would be disengenuous, although Meat's stance was that he had a right to hold whatever belief he had back then (which is right imo), and on this occasion has simply avoided comment. Also, to be fair, he agreed on that occasion (I think the only occasion he has ever appeared at a rally, rather than an inauguration which is business rather than support) in return for a private meeting with the candidate to explore his concerns and the latter's intentions away from public statements
Quote:
No, if a musician wants to use their position to trumpet their political stance they're welcome to go for it. They're also welcome to face the consequences and their fans are under no obligation to like it. It's the idea that certain people should be given a platform where they are beyond reproach - where they can stand up and say 'hey fans! Look where I am! Look who I'm singing for! Vote for this guy!' and we all have to go 'oh, well, crumbs, I shouldn't say anything negative about that because I might offend the person who just asked for my attention".
I don't think anyone on the planet has the right to be deliberately divisive, deliberately air their views and then be immune to any responses that are less than positive. Luckily very few people think that's true. Very few.
|
I agree .. although I think they should have to face reasoned argument rather than punishing hatred. I have given reasoned argument to people I know who support Trump; I do not vilify them as human beings, nor wiped them from my contact list. Had Meat publicly supported or endorsed Trump I would have been disappointed, I would perhaps have argued .. but that would not to me diminish the value of his work, and I would not have threatened to burn his albums, nor called him vile names. Artists, like anyone else, have a right to hold and express a view. We applaud them when they do this to draw attention to the plight of those we can all agree are in desperate need, to raise funding. I don't think we can reasonably heap hatred on them if their concern for their country's future inspires them to speak out, even if they are not on the side we favour, although they should be aware that they may well disappoint, even disaffect some of their fans.
You say you don't think rock and roll and politics mix. To me it's not so much whether they mix or not; everyone has the right to speak out on what they believe in, and like Julie I disagree with those who say they should just "shut up and sing"; but each has to accept the potential fall-out and make a wise judgement based on probabilities. I think one needs to be able to spot the contents of the chalice proffered. McCain's proved somewhat bitter .. this inaugural one is heavily poisoned.