I've said it before, but I really appreciate your integrity, Trollheart.
The questions you raise in that entry remind me of my own thoughts surrounding my journal. I want to make the point that I have strong convictions about my beliefs, but I don't want to be so censored that I'm essentially pumping out propaganda (if you remember my post about Leslie Phillips, I'd rather not act as a right-wing propaganda machine).
If you've read my most recent review on "Tomorrow, in a Year," you would noticed that it's an album that pays tribute to Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution, which I don't completely agree with. I had to ask myself a few questions before I wrote that review. Though I'm a creationist, I don't like demonizing scientists who do legitimate work and come to fair theoretical conclusions. The church did that to Galileo, and ended up having to apologize for it later. There's no denying that the Earth is round, and that there are planets in outer space. I have no moral qualms over that fact. Galileo was actually a creationist himself, and if he was anything like me, he may have used science as a means of discovering the depths of creation.
But anyway, I have come across a lot of hateful messages from people who consider themselves members of various beliefs, philosophies and religions. A lot of them are very well written and appear logically sound. From my study of psychology, I began to realize that there are people who are extremely gifted at making logically sound arguments; but their logic is always lacking something. Scientists are right only until someone else comes along and proves them wrong (they really love it when that happens. lol). Lawyers might make a brilliantly elegant case against a person, but in the end the wrong person sometimes still goes to jail because the lawyer was good at playing devil's advocate.
I've also learned in my studies that there are some very gifted people out there who use their intellect in unhealthy ways. If someone is always on the defensive, and seems to have a conspiratorial or extreme attitude about the outside world, they are likely in an unhealthy frame of mind. On top of that, if they're good communicators, their edgy and elegant language are effective at adding a "wow" factor to whatever they write, because they seem to have a perspective nobody else knows; a leg up on conventional thinking. But in the end, it's all just a logically sound illusion they create from feelings of distrust; a bit like the conspiracies of a paranoid schizophrenic. As long as people can't prove them wrong, they can perpetuate the illusion and are content in their unhealthy frame of mind.
When it comes to including artists in my journal, as much as I like the idea of being all-inclusive, I try to be careful not to promote anything I wouldn't be comfortable listening to myself, no matter how impressive or interesting the music may be. Not out of the idea of censorship, but of personal conviction. I like to feature artists that help to cultivate healthy perspectives on life, so that people are left better off for having listened to them. I feel better about myself when I trust my moral compass. If I feel like I'm making any kind of compromise, I'm allowing myself a chance to do something I might regret later, especially when there are other people involved.
Anyway, that's my opinion. I hope it helps. And I hope this guy's music doesn't trouble you for too long, either. I don't know if it's worth the stress
