Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Bands, Artists and Genres Appreciation
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Prog and Socialism
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedProg and Socialism

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
jesperz View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 12 2006
Location: Singapore
Status: Offline
Points: 233
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 12:49
Personally i think that this issue is down to personal issue...

Some progger might be socialist, while the others are not..

maybe even punk rockers a socialists... I don't know..

But i don't think this issue can be generalized and labelled that all proggers are socialists, its pretty unfair to those ain't.

For me, I am ignorant towards socialism... Yes i do read them on the newspaper, but hardly even think of it other than that.. =)
<<Dark side of Z' Drummination>>
Back to Top
FragileDT View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: June 20 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1485
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 12:23
Originally posted by Catholic Flame Catholic Flame wrote:

Originally posted by Syzygy Syzygy wrote:

Originally posted by Catholic Flame Catholic Flame wrote:


Originally posted by Syzygy Syzygy wrote:

Originally posted by Catholic Flame Catholic Flame wrote:

Originally posted by BestFreak BestFreak wrote:


If we look at the political spectrum back in the 1950's and 1960's, we
will find that most political parties which named themselves "progressive"
were socialist/left-wing in nature. In a way, socialim provided the political
spectrum with an alternative to the then-outdated nationalist/
conservative movements, which ultimately resulted in two world wars.
Bearing this in mind, I think we can say that "socialism" (as a new way of
main-stream political thinking) paved the way for "progressive music" (as
a new way of writing music).


Also, quite remarkable is the fact that "capitalism" (as a means to
maximize profits) lead to the emergence of consumerism in all aspects of
life, including arts (and particularly the music industry). How else can we
explain the myriad of bands who emerge everyday, to sell one rubbish
album to today's teenagers? In that sense, "progressive music" does not
have "profit maximization" as a target, and therefore is far from being
"capitalist" in nature. It is safe, therefore, to claim that Progressive Rock
does have some conceptual similarities with "Socialism".


Am I making any sense at all?



<SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: #111111; FONT-FAMILY:
Tahoma">But, to paraphrase Ayn Rand, communism controls people by
force and socialism controls them with the vote. Capitalism allows people
free expression. <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-
com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN>


<SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: #111111; FONT-FAMILY:
Tahoma">Isn't that what "Prog" should be about? Choice! For good or for
bad we get to choose.</SPAN>


 



Capitalism only offers the illusion of choice - when Pravda printed
statements like that about communism in the Soviet Union nobody
believed them. Why so many people swallow the enormous untruths
about US consumer capitalism without a moment's pause for critical
reflection is one of the great mysteries of our age.


Ayn Rand's half baked merging of Adam Smith economics and a 3rd
Reich style misreading of Nietszche is intellectually bankrupt and morally
vacuous. If you're going to try to back up your arguments, try citing a
source that has at least an iota of credibility.



So Pravda is your credible source?????????????????????????????????????



My point:



  1. Pravda, the state owned Soviet newspaper (the name means 'Truth' in
    Russian) used to print blatant propaganda about the Soviet system
  2. This was believed by almost nobody in the West, and apparently by a
    vanishingly small number of people in the Soviet Union as well
  3. Pravda was not a credible source.

Moving on:



  1. Media owned by huge multinational corporations with a vested interest
    in scorched earth consumer capitalism print blatant propaganda about
    consumer capitalism
  2. This is believed by worryingly large numbers of people
  3. News International et al are not credible sources

Now go and read Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky, in which
every argument is backed up with checkable and verifiable citations. His
prose style is highly readable, which is more than can be said for Ayn
Rand.



<SPAN style="COLOR: #111111; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">But
what prog group ever thanked Noam Chomsky?<?:namespace prefix = o
ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

</SPAN>


<SPAN style="COLOR: #111111; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">
Rush thanked Ayn Rand. <o:p></o:p>
</SPAN>


<SPAN style="COLOR: #111111; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">If
this site was devoted to political discussion it might -- might -- be worth
the time. But since we are talking about Prog music, again what prog
group ever thanked Noam Chomsky? Has any other group sighted a
political/economic figure? <o:p></o:p>
</SPAN>


<SPAN style="COLOR: #111111; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">It
would be interesting to know.<o:p></o:p>
</SPAN>


 



You don't need to site political figures to write songs that include political
meanings. All anti-war songs have political meaning and name me a prog
band that doesn't have one (slight exaggeration.) Gabriel has had some
political basis in his music (not much, but hints) and Neil Peart ALWAYS
has something to say politically. While not naming a figure, the majority
of his songs are about economics and politics. Same with Pink Floyd.
One likes to believe
In the freedom of music
But glittering prizes
And endless Compromises
Shatter the illusion
Of integrity
Back to Top
Catholic Flame View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 17 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 295
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 11:00
Originally posted by Syzygy Syzygy wrote:

Originally posted by Catholic Flame Catholic Flame wrote:

Originally posted by Syzygy Syzygy wrote:

Originally posted by Catholic Flame Catholic Flame wrote:

Originally posted by BestFreak BestFreak wrote:

If we look at the political spectrum back in the 1950's and 1960's, we will find that most political parties which named themselves "progressive" were socialist/left-wing in nature. In a way, socialim provided the political spectrum with an alternative to the then-outdated nationalist/conservative movements, which ultimately resulted in two world wars. Bearing this in mind, I think we can say that "socialism" (as a new way of main-stream political thinking) paved the way for "progressive music" (as a new way of writing music).

Also, quite remarkable is the fact that "capitalism" (as a means to maximize profits) lead to the emergence of consumerism in all aspects of life, including arts (and particularly the music industry). How else can we explain the myriad of bands who emerge everyday, to sell one rubbish album to today's teenagers? In that sense, "progressive music" does not have "profit maximization" as a target, and therefore is far from being "capitalist" in nature. It is safe, therefore, to claim that Progressive Rock does have some conceptual similarities with "Socialism".

Am I making any sense at all?

But, to paraphrase Ayn Rand, communism controls people by force and socialism controls them with the vote. Capitalism allows people free expression.

Isn't that what "Prog" should be about? Choice! For good or for bad we get to choose.

 

Capitalism only offers the illusion of choice - when Pravda printed statements like that about communism in the Soviet Union nobody believed them. Why so many people swallow the enormous untruths about US consumer capitalism without a moment's pause for critical reflection is one of the great mysteries of our age.

Ayn Rand's half baked merging of Adam Smith economics and a 3rd Reich style misreading of Nietszche is intellectually bankrupt and morally vacuous. If you're going to try to back up your arguments, try citing a source that has at least an iota of credibility.

So Pravda is your credible source?????????????????????????????????????

My point:

  1. Pravda, the state owned Soviet newspaper (the name means 'Truth' in Russian) used to print blatant propaganda about the Soviet system
  2. This was believed by almost nobody in the West, and apparently by a vanishingly small number of people in the Soviet Union as well
  3. Pravda was not a credible source.

Moving on:

  1. Media owned by huge multinational corporations with a vested interest in scorched earth consumer capitalism print blatant propaganda about consumer capitalism
  2. This is believed by worryingly large numbers of people
  3. News International et al are not credible sources

Now go and read Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky, in which every argument is backed up with checkable and verifiable citations. His prose style is highly readable, which is more than can be said for Ayn Rand.

But what prog group ever thanked Noam Chomsky?

Rush thanked Ayn Rand.

If this site was devoted to political discussion it might -- might -- be worth the time. But since we are talking about Prog music, again what prog group ever thanked Noam Chomsky? Has any other group sighted a political/economic figure?

It would be interesting to know.

 

“Great things are not accomplished by those who yield to trends and fads and popular opinion.”

~Jack Kerouac
Back to Top
Dr Know View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 10 2006
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 532
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 10:53
How can you love a president who has been proven to be a blatant liar? They could have got rid of Saddam by using a sniper, they didn´t have to start a full scale war.
Back to Top
ken4musiq View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 14 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 446
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 10:40
Originally posted by grandoleopry grandoleopry wrote:

Originally posted by mithrandir mithrandir wrote:

Originally posted by grandoleopry grandoleopry wrote:

Elitist, populist. This doesn't sound to socialistic to me. In fact critics hate prog because it does not reflect the us against the man mentality, the haves against the have nots,the the proletariat against the bourgeoisie They felt that rock was first and foremost a political tool for Marxist Ideal isms and that prog led people away from all the inequality and the injustice. This is why punk was praised as reviving the spirit of rock. The early prog bands were observationalists for the most part and madingley apolitical. Sorry, but in my view the absents of socialism in music was the reason prog was scorned, not embraced.


hmm, I guess you're not very familiar with Henry Cow, Faust and Area then are you?


Just a theory, why else then? The music is too complicated after downing a couple six packs of Bud?
I've really never understood the hatred amongst the rock critics for prog and this was about the most applicable explanation I've run into considering that most journalists get a very liberal education. It would seem naive to dismiss the great influence Marxism holds on young journalists. That's not to say that prog is conservative at all it's just may be perceived that way for the statements I quoted earlier. Remember, Marxist ideals permeate most universities and some political correct pundits would find a fascist under every toilet seat. If you got a better theory then lets hear it, I'm open...

I think early prog is romantic in its leaning and gets its ideology from that rather than politics. I really don't think it has a Marxist bent other than the fact that Marx was a Nineteenth Century romantic figure. Marxism has wavered from universities since the faiing of the Berlin wall and is really no longer a viable discourse although many older professors will still harken back to '60s liberalism.  As someone said earlier, it is really problematic to see politics in a liberal v conservative dichotomy that really says nothing about reality.

I think there may be some truth in what you are saying about jounalists who villlified prog as elitist  and exalted punk as truly rock n roll.  If you read reviews of prog from the '70s in Time Magazine, the New York Times and other mainstream, non-musical press, you will find that there is not this bias against prog that existed in Rolling Stone, Creem and the NME.

Prog was a working class music. Emerson and both Andersons, came from very meager backgrounds. As a matter of fact, it is the public school kids: Bruford, Gabriel, Waters and Sinfield that have always stood out without people questioning the classist bias in that. Ian Anderson is a much better song writer than any of them.

Back to Top
mickstafa View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: March 24 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 236
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 10:28
And it's so easy to criticize the world.  Oh woe is me.
Back to Top
FragileDT View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: June 20 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1485
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 10:27
Originally posted by mickstafa mickstafa wrote:

COME ON!!! Are you so, as you liberals like to say,
"close minded" to
think that conservatives actually WANT WAR???  No one wants
war!  No one wants evil, fighting, dying.  But WAKE UP! 
Name one generation in the history of our species that did not have
war?  War, like lying, cheating, stealing, etc. unfortunately is a
part of being human.  We must supress the violence and the seeds
of war.  The only way to do this is through combating it. 
The only way to combat it is through fighting the instigators. 
That includes ruthless dictators that promote terror.

Lefties boast about their human rights activism.  But then again,
if the left had their way, Saddam would still be in power.  Is
that just for those iraqis?  Is that just for those who are
absolutely powerless??????  This is stupid, I'm going back to
prog.  But once again, get off the high horse already and wake up
to reality.



You haven't proven anything. All you're saying is we should be at war
because we must combat our seeds of war that we have? You can have
you're view but don't tell me I'm on my high horse and to "wake up to
reality." The only reason we're in Iraq is to control the oil that would
otherwise screw over our economy. But you can overlook that and think
that good old Bush knows what he's doing. It's the easy way out to agree
with everything your country does.

Enjoy.
One likes to believe
In the freedom of music
But glittering prizes
And endless Compromises
Shatter the illusion
Of integrity
Back to Top
Syzygy View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 16 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 7003
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 10:25

Originally posted by mickstafa mickstafa wrote:

COME ON!!! Are you so, as you liberals like to say, "close minded" to think that conservatives actually WANT WAR???  No one wants war!  No one wants evil, fighting, dying.  But WAKE UP!  Name one generation in the history of our species that did not have war?  War, like lying, cheating, stealing, etc. unfortunately is a part of being human.  We must supress the violence and the seeds of war.  The only way to do this is through combating it.  The only way to combat it is through fighting the instigators.  That includes ruthless dictators that promote terror.

Lefties boast about their human rights activism.  But then again, if the left had their way, Saddam would still be in power.  Is that just for those iraqis?  Is that just for those who are absolutely powerless??????  This is stupid, I'm going back to prog.  But once again, get off the high horse already and wake up to reality.

What about the military/industrial axis which accounts for such a large part of so many major economies (USA, UK, France, Germany)? Surely they've got a vested interest in the continuation of armed conflict?

'Like so many of you
I've got my doubts about how much to contribute
to the already rich among us...'

Robert Wyatt, Gloria Gloom


Back to Top
mickstafa View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: March 24 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 236
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 10:19
COME ON!!! Are you so, as you liberals like to say, "close minded" to think that conservatives actually WANT WAR???  No one wants war!  No one wants evil, fighting, dying.  But WAKE UP!  Name one generation in the history of our species that did not have war?  War, like lying, cheating, stealing, etc. unfortunately is a part of being human.  We must supress the violence and the seeds of war.  The only way to do this is through combating it.  The only way to combat it is through fighting the instigators.  That includes ruthless dictators that promote terror.

Lefties boast about their human rights activism.  But then again, if the left had their way, Saddam would still be in power.  Is that just for those iraqis?  Is that just for those who are absolutely powerless??????  This is stupid, I'm going back to prog.  But once again, get off the high horse already and wake up to reality.
Back to Top
Syzygy View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 16 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 7003
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 10:18
Originally posted by Catholic Flame Catholic Flame wrote:

Originally posted by Syzygy Syzygy wrote:

Originally posted by Catholic Flame Catholic Flame wrote:

Originally posted by BestFreak BestFreak wrote:

If we look at the political spectrum back in the 1950's and 1960's, we will find that most political parties which named themselves "progressive" were socialist/left-wing in nature. In a way, socialim provided the political spectrum with an alternative to the then-outdated nationalist/conservative movements, which ultimately resulted in two world wars. Bearing this in mind, I think we can say that "socialism" (as a new way of main-stream political thinking) paved the way for "progressive music" (as a new way of writing music).

Also, quite remarkable is the fact that "capitalism" (as a means to maximize profits) lead to the emergence of consumerism in all aspects of life, including arts (and particularly the music industry). How else can we explain the myriad of bands who emerge everyday, to sell one rubbish album to today's teenagers? In that sense, "progressive music" does not have "profit maximization" as a target, and therefore is far from being "capitalist" in nature. It is safe, therefore, to claim that Progressive Rock does have some conceptual similarities with "Socialism".

Am I making any sense at all?

But, to paraphrase Ayn Rand, communism controls people by force and socialism controls them with the vote. Capitalism allows people free expression.

Isn't that what "Prog" should be about? Choice! For good or for bad we get to choose.

 

Capitalism only offers the illusion of choice - when Pravda printed statements like that about communism in the Soviet Union nobody believed them. Why so many people swallow the enormous untruths about US consumer capitalism without a moment's pause for critical reflection is one of the great mysteries of our age.

Ayn Rand's half baked merging of Adam Smith economics and a 3rd Reich style misreading of Nietszche is intellectually bankrupt and morally vacuous. If you're going to try to back up your arguments, try citing a source that has at least an iota of credibility.

So Pravda is your credible source?????????????????????????????????????

My point:

  1. Pravda, the state owned Soviet newspaper (the name means 'Truth' in Russian) used to print blatant propaganda about the Soviet system
  2. This was believed by almost nobody in the West, and apparently by a vanishingly small number of people in the Soviet Union as well
  3. Pravda was not a credible source.

Moving on:

  1. Media owned by huge multinational corporations with a vested interest in scorched earth consumer capitalism print blatant propaganda about consumer capitalism
  2. This is believed by worryingly large numbers of people
  3. News International et al are not credible sources

Now go and read Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky, in which every argument is backed up with checkable and verifiable citations. His prose style is highly readable, which is more than can be said for Ayn Rand.

'Like so many of you
I've got my doubts about how much to contribute
to the already rich among us...'

Robert Wyatt, Gloria Gloom


Back to Top
FragileDT View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: June 20 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1485
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 10:08
Originally posted by mickstafa mickstafa wrote:

Blah blah, stupid thread!

I'm conservative, republican, love our President, support the war on
terror (yes, I actually believe you have to stand up and fight evil in
this world).  I'm not afraid to say it either.

Listen, those who think prog=liberal are mis-informed, or are
themselves "close minded" (argh I hate that word!)  Prog to most
is comperable to art.  You don't get political propoganda from
most of it.  Art, of course, is not for the artists but for the
public. 

That means its up to YOU to decide what you get out of prog.  I
personally get a lot of Christian (OOOPS, I said the C-word!!! )
theology from it, even if that wasn't the artist's intent.  I'm so
sick of this liberal high-brow that you see, especially on this
board.  Get off yer high horses.



Well when tons of people are getting killed in a war that was falsely
created it's kind of hard to get off our "high horses." We're not at war with
terrorism or the people that created the terror on 9/11 (give the props to
Saudi Arabia and Al Caeda (however it's spelled)). It's all false, even all my
republican conservative friends agree with me. Now I'm not saying that
you need to believe this, I'm just saying that's why we're on our "high
horses." We don't like when people are dying for unjust reasons.

Next: If you look a little closer you would notice that 90% of prog bands
do have socialist TYPE views and are anti-war and about peace. It doesn't
take someone to look that hard into the genre to see that. Of course, that
doesn't mean that a pro-war person can't listen to it. Anyone can listen to
anything they want, and get anything they want out of it.

EDIT: And you're right, there are tons of Christian views in a lot of prog
today. I get a lot out of that as well.

Edited by FragileDT
One likes to believe
In the freedom of music
But glittering prizes
And endless Compromises
Shatter the illusion
Of integrity
Back to Top
mickstafa View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: March 24 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 236
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 10:03
Blah blah, stupid thread!

I'm conservative, republican, love our President, support the war on terror (yes, I actually believe you have to stand up and fight evil in this world).  I'm not afraid to say it either.

Listen, those who think prog=liberal are mis-informed, or are themselves "close minded" (argh I hate that word!)  Prog to most is comperable to art.  You don't get political propoganda from most of it.  Art, of course, is not for the artists but for the public. 

That means its up to YOU to decide what you get out of prog.  I personally get a lot of Christian (OOOPS, I said the C-word!!! ) theology from it, even if that wasn't the artist's intent.  I'm so sick of this liberal high-brow that you see, especially on this board.  Get off yer high horses.
Back to Top
Catholic Flame View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 17 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 295
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 09:59
Originally posted by Syzygy Syzygy wrote:

Originally posted by Catholic Flame Catholic Flame wrote:

Originally posted by BestFreak BestFreak wrote:

If we look at the political spectrum back in the 1950's and 1960's, we will find that most political parties which named themselves "progressive" were socialist/left-wing in nature. In a way, socialim provided the political spectrum with an alternative to the then-outdated nationalist/conservative movements, which ultimately resulted in two world wars. Bearing this in mind, I think we can say that "socialism" (as a new way of main-stream political thinking) paved the way for "progressive music" (as a new way of writing music).

Also, quite remarkable is the fact that "capitalism" (as a means to maximize profits) lead to the emergence of consumerism in all aspects of life, including arts (and particularly the music industry). How else can we explain the myriad of bands who emerge everyday, to sell one rubbish album to today's teenagers? In that sense, "progressive music" does not have "profit maximization" as a target, and therefore is far from being "capitalist" in nature. It is safe, therefore, to claim that Progressive Rock does have some conceptual similarities with "Socialism".

Am I making any sense at all?

But, to paraphrase Ayn Rand, communism controls people by force and socialism controls them with the vote. Capitalism allows people free expression.

Isn't that what "Prog" should be about? Choice! For good or for bad we get to choose.

 

Capitalism only offers the illusion of choice - when Pravda printed statements like that about communism in the Soviet Union nobody believed them. Why so many people swallow the enormous untruths about US consumer capitalism without a moment's pause for critical reflection is one of the great mysteries of our age.

Ayn Rand's half baked merging of Adam Smith economics and a 3rd Reich style misreading of Nietszche is intellectually bankrupt and morally vacuous. If you're going to try to back up your arguments, try citing a source that has at least an iota of credibility.

So Pravda is your credible source?????????????????????????????????????

“Great things are not accomplished by those who yield to trends and fads and popular opinion.”

~Jack Kerouac
Back to Top
Syzygy View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 16 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 7003
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 09:50
Originally posted by Catholic Flame Catholic Flame wrote:

Originally posted by BestFreak BestFreak wrote:

If we look at the political spectrum back in the 1950's and 1960's, we will find that most political parties which named themselves "progressive" were socialist/left-wing in nature. In a way, socialim provided the political spectrum with an alternative to the then-outdated nationalist/conservative movements, which ultimately resulted in two world wars. Bearing this in mind, I think we can say that "socialism" (as a new way of main-stream political thinking) paved the way for "progressive music" (as a new way of writing music).

Also, quite remarkable is the fact that "capitalism" (as a means to maximize profits) lead to the emergence of consumerism in all aspects of life, including arts (and particularly the music industry). How else can we explain the myriad of bands who emerge everyday, to sell one rubbish album to today's teenagers? In that sense, "progressive music" does not have "profit maximization" as a target, and therefore is far from being "capitalist" in nature. It is safe, therefore, to claim that Progressive Rock does have some conceptual similarities with "Socialism".

Am I making any sense at all?

But, to paraphrase Ayn Rand, communism controls people by force and socialism controls them with the vote. Capitalism allows people free expression.

Isn't that what "Prog" should be about? Choice! For good or for bad we get to choose.

 

Capitalism only offers the illusion of choice - when Pravda printed statements like that about communism in the Soviet Union nobody believed them. Why so many people swallow the enormous untruths about US consumer capitalism without a moment's pause for critical reflection is one of the great mysteries of our age.

Ayn Rand's half baked merging of Adam Smith economics and a 3rd Reich style misreading of Nietszche is intellectually bankrupt and morally vacuous. If you're going to try to back up your arguments, try citing a source that has at least an iota of credibility.

'Like so many of you
I've got my doubts about how much to contribute
to the already rich among us...'

Robert Wyatt, Gloria Gloom


Back to Top
FragileDT View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: June 20 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1485
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 09:50
Originally posted by robertplantowns robertplantowns wrote:

Originally posted by FragileDT FragileDT wrote:

You don't have many pro-
war conservative republican prog bands and that's a fact.


And FragileDT, I'm not saying that you think this, I'm just using the quote
as an example, I HATE when Americans place a false dichotomy on the
republican and democratic party as the PRO-WAR and the ANTI-WAR
party.  This view of the parties, what they stand for, and their underlying
ideologies is narrowminded and considers only one moment in time,
leaving out the entire history of the parties and what they really stand
for.  It's a statement that 5 years olds make who have lived through the
Iraq war and use that as the differentiating factor between the two
parties.  


To Robertplantowns: I wasn't saying that ALL conservative right-wing
republicans were pro-war. I was just saying that you don't find many prog
players that are pro-war (which they do absolutely exist) right-wing
conservatives. I know many republicans that are opposed to war and
ESPECIALLY this one against "terrorism." Sorry if that came off wrong to
you, but I understand what you are saying.
One likes to believe
In the freedom of music
But glittering prizes
And endless Compromises
Shatter the illusion
Of integrity
Back to Top
Catholic Flame View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 17 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 295
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 09:24
Originally posted by BestFreak BestFreak wrote:

If we look at the political spectrum back in the 1950's and 1960's, we will find that most political parties which named themselves "progressive" were socialist/left-wing in nature. In a way, socialim provided the political spectrum with an alternative to the then-outdated nationalist/conservative movements, which ultimately resulted in two world wars. Bearing this in mind, I think we can say that "socialism" (as a new way of main-stream political thinking) paved the way for "progressive music" (as a new way of writing music).

Also, quite remarkable is the fact that "capitalism" (as a means to maximize profits) lead to the emergence of consumerism in all aspects of life, including arts (and particularly the music industry). How else can we explain the myriad of bands who emerge everyday, to sell one rubbish album to today's teenagers? In that sense, "progressive music" does not have "profit maximization" as a target, and therefore is far from being "capitalist" in nature. It is safe, therefore, to claim that Progressive Rock does have some conceptual similarities with "Socialism".

Am I making any sense at all?

But, to paraphrase Ayn Rand, communism controls people by force and socialism controls them with the vote. Capitalism allows people free expression.

Isn't that what "Prog" should be about? Choice! For good or for bad we get to choose.

 

“Great things are not accomplished by those who yield to trends and fads and popular opinion.”

~Jack Kerouac
Back to Top
freebird View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 04 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 135
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 08:46
Originally posted by Trotsky Trotsky wrote:

I also happen to think that it's close-minded to say that religion/politics shouldn't be mixed with music/literature ... although ....

IMO it's very rare that they combine successfully ... but I think it's up to the artist not the fan to decide what message they (the artist) can convey

 

I think prog music is more able to convey complex social/political ideas than pop music is. (And the prog listener is supposed to be more cerebral!)
Back to Top
Syzygy View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 16 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 7003
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 07:43

Originally posted by Paul K. Paul K. wrote:

My political views are pretty close to right-wing (I presume I'm single one here) and I'm avid progger. Anyway I don't think, that mixing politics or religion with music is good idea. However sometimes it does work.

Not quite, but it does put you in the minority.

'Like so many of you
I've got my doubts about how much to contribute
to the already rich among us...'

Robert Wyatt, Gloria Gloom


Back to Top
Paul K. View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 26 2006
Location: Russian Federation
Status: Offline
Points: 197
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 06:47
My political views are pretty close to right-wing (I presume I'm single one here) and I'm avid progger. Anyway I don't think, that mixing politics or religion with music is good idea. However sometimes it does work.
Weasels ripped my flesh
Back to Top
MorgothSunshine View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 03 2005
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 298
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 14 2006 at 06:09

I want to say something about Italian scene.

In the '70s italian prog was extremely politicized obviously in a socialist way.

All the prog festivals concerts happenings was organized mainly by socialist students. In this situation some bands must declare themselves socialists just to to play live...the few bands that declared themselves conservative had been discriminated and ignored.

This is what happened in early '70s...after the situation changed progressively and the political side becames a marginal aspect. 

For every truth even the contrary is true...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.195 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.