Blogcritics: Comments on That Was Then, This Is Now

Comment by Eric Olsen

Sat, 22 Feb 2003 14:09:43 EST

Chitta, If this is the "first and last time" you will be reading, I'm not sure there is any point responding to you, but a few quick points: the war is not to make people like us, it's to kill, imprison, or disperse those who will never "like" us, whose avowed purpose is to kill as many of us as possible and shatter our way of life. I don't give a shit about them liking us, I want them dead or put away. RE corporate takeover of radio, look around at this site a tiny bit: there are maybe 500 articles about corporate takeover of radio and music in general, we talk about it every day. Look before you speak. Re protest music: as I said, there is plenty of it, it just doesn't resonate with the public the way it did 30 years ago for the reasons I stated, which was the whole point.

Comment by chitta

Sat, 22 Feb 2003 09:31:44 EST

Hey Mr. Brunson... why don't you shut up...I'm tired of ultra-patriotic dimwits like your self. Instead of making ANY attempt to argue 'Bob Jones' points, you revert to the tired "shut up and leave" arguement that only idiots who cannot muster up any intelligent debate use. And since when is it a sign of greatness that one "required to attend school past high school"? It doesn't seem like you did. And stop with the equally tired and stupid arguement about how our soldiers died to supposedly protect my first amendment right to protest and free speech. It is just as "American" to dissent, protest, and complain about our country, society, and government. Soldiers died because they were soldiers; mere pawns for our leaders war ambitions. What do you want me to say? Thank you to Mr. Brunson's family who died in some war for my right to dissent? Why? They died doing their job as anyone else would have. Anyhow, as far as this guys Olsen's dumbass assessment of the state of protest music, I have a few things to add. Protests songs aren't all just simple folkish "sloganeering" type songs. Maybe thats all that you heard. There are many other types of protest music, including some jazz and classical where there even aren't any words. The protest songs of the '60s weren't all just about Vietnam. They were also about the civil rights movement, the womens rights movement, and other important issues in society at the time. find it very telling that you want to twist this debate into something about Vietnam and this current war in Iraq instead of the main point in Mr. Epstein's article about the corporatization of the music business and the music delivery business. How come you don't have anything relevant to say about that? Maybe you have some sort of personal vendetta against Mr. Epstein? I dunno...this is the first and likely last time I will be reading your blog. And finally, your point that the whole 'domino' which supposedly explained our reason for being in Vietnam was too complicated for the youth is absurd. Frankly, this so called 'War on Terror' is more obscure, indirect, or theoretical than Vietnam ever was. Ask the average guy why terrorist attacked us on 9/11, and you'll get some response like "uh..dunno..cuz they don't like us??" and ask them why, and they'll be hard pressed to give us a reason. Which is exactly what people like you want, and plays directly into the sinister plans of your ilk. This War on Terror doesn't have clear enemies. It doesn't have a clear location or time, and there is no endgame what so ever. We're basically trying to fight a war against not being liked and popular. So what do we do? Instead of trying to create dialogue or address the grievances of these people, we're going to try and bomb them all and "get 'em...dead or alive." Yup, great thinking there. Anyhow, there are quite of few artists writing and performing what you would call 'protest' songs, but obviously with your pro-hawk stance, you're not even open to listening to one.

Comment by Ben Brunson

Fri, 21 Feb 2003 15:03:16 EST

Hey Bob- If you don't like it here, then do all of us a favor. Shut up and leave. There are plenty of great countries around the world that live in poverty and socialism. I'm so sick and tired of little whiners like you. You have it so good here in the United States. You are not required to attend school past high school. You are not required to serve in the military. You are not required to do anything that you don't want to do, within the law. You do not have to be anyone. You have it so good here and all you do is waste everyone's time with this sorry, ill thought rhetoric. Way to go Bob. I feel so much better living in America knowing that my family gave their lives in War to pave the way for over achievers like you!

Comment by bob jones

Fri, 21 Feb 2003 12:40:59 EST

Who has the energy to march, the creativity to protest when Americans are sleeping less, working more to support their superficial, consumerist, addictived lives? Got to pay for that SUV, Home Shopping Network, must redecorate/remodel lifestyle, fueled by artificially low interest rates and a $300 tax credit (I haven't seen mine, did you get yours?) that's supposed to stimulate our economy by getting us shopping again. For a lot of people it's more like with $300 maybe you could get your kids teeth fixed, or pay the fuel bill so you don't freeze to death. I refer you to the book, "When Society Becomes an Addict" which outlines just how the military/industrial machine retains it's workforce by keeping them too sedated and addicted to protest their miserable lives. We think we live so well here. I think a re-evaluation of "quality of life" is in order and it does not include overworked, overstressed, overfed, overshopped and overstimulated. And it also doesn't include being manipulated into a catastrophic war by some asshole who can't say the word nuclear. But heh, just put another shrimp on the bar-b while I watch Pay Per View. There's your protest.

Comment by Lou Kingman

Thu, 20 Feb 2003 23:11:30 EST

Then is protest itself a "then/now thing"? A fashion? In the past week over 5 million people staged the largest single protest in history. Do they lack a proper sense of fashion? I have to say that I think the analysis of protest music made herein is absurd. Maybe it's just that when you have now only a handful of recording companies controlling almost everything, this is the homogenized, white toast, cookies and milk product you end up with. Rap offers violence and all, but it doesn't really squeeze anyone politically. Political dissent on the other hand, well that's uncomfortable. The point of your Grammy's article was how long it typically takes for the industry to recognize it's market. Show the exec's that there's a market for protest music and I'm sure they'll publish it. But if the lag time is similar to what it's been in the past, we have a while yet to wait.

Comment by shannon

Thu, 20 Feb 2003 15:06:57 EST

Yeah! The musicians are just laying low recuperating from the continual changes going on in their lives....more music will come as soon as things work themselves out one way or another....it's difficult to get an angle on things when you are so confused by everything that is going on daily! better question to ask is where is the country's real leadership.....perhaps someone could actually go and speak with Saddam Hussein??? Bring him a sword as a peace pipe and figure out a workable solution for everyone.....Hell....get me the meeting and the plane ticket and I could do that! Jesus! Christ!

Comment by Eric Olsen

Sat, 15 Feb 2003 16:50:40 EST

I agree with you on this - I included this guy because even someone so obviously doctrinaire left sees our current situation as different from Vietnam.

Comment by Al Barger

Sat, 15 Feb 2003 16:44:35 EST

Here one group of religious fanatics represented by George Bush and Mr. Ashcroft is pitted against religious fanatics even more despotic than they are. Jesus H Criminy, what an idiot. I'm not totally thrilled with every last idea coming from the Bush administration, but describing them as "religious fanatics" pretty well eliminates this Sorel from the ranks of serious people. It would be hard to be more moderate in applying religious beliefs to their public duties than Bush and Ashcroft. Basically, anyone in politics who actually believes in Jesus is automatically an "extremist" or "fanatic." Other religions may likely get more slack, but American liberals now basically consider Christianity [other than the fake Bill Clinton type] a pre-emptive disqualification from public life.

Comment by Al Barger

Sat, 15 Feb 2003 16:32:59 EST

Oh, there's still social protest to be found. If'n you wants an anti-war song with melody and substance, CLICK HERE for "Living Life Among the Zombies". It's a sweet, gentle little nightmare creeping up on you. If, on the other hand, you want a more humorous, rock and roll take, CLICK HERE for "I Think I'm Better Than You".