The whole ethos of punk music is essentially right wing in a political sense, although perhaps 'conservative libertarian' would be a better phrase than right wing (the whole DIY thing, independent music labels as small businesses, ideas of individual thought and action being free of suppression etc.) which is odd since lots of people involved in punk would probably identify themselves with the left, especially in Britain.

It was therefore no fluke that punk preceded Thatcherism and later Reaganism. It was the vanguard of the new right.

Of course one shouldn't confuse 'right wing' with racism which is something separate.

In my opinion listening to genuinely racist punk music like Skrewdriver means that you are validating the sentiment behind the music, which is of course race hate.

You can't simply say that you are enjoying the music, not the words and be taken seriously. It's like saying a black and white minstrel show would be acceptable because you like the vaudeville , not the offensive racial stereotypes. You couldn't possible say its fine to like SS marching band music because its quite stirring but don't support anti Semitic genocide. In those cases the whole form of the art is tainted by its context and purpose.

But freedom of speech is incredible important. I will support the racists right to freedom of speech while completely opposing the racist on every other count. Without freedom of speech we are in a much more dangerous state than one where bitter, failed, ignorant human beings spew their projected self loathing on to alien people and cultures.

I have to disagree with that statement. I don't relate DIY ethics to conservative libertarianism, as much as I do with Anarchism which is a usually a left wing phenomeneon.

Anarchism in western society has often been practiced through a complete rejection of the capitalist state, by producing one's own commodities, (clothing, electricity, food production ect.)

Most of the punk at the time were seeking to disengage from the musical mainstream dictated by large corporations to produce music that reflected thier own values.

To my knowledge west coast punk bands like the Dead Kennedys, Circle Jerks, D.O.A. and Black Flag who were all leftists, chose to stay on independent labels throughout the bulk of thier career. (Although the Circle Jerks jumped) In other words personal values was more important than profit.

Anarchism unlike Marxism, has a libertarian free market aspect to it, but its social outlook is generally rooted in secular liberalism.

Right wing punk really had its head chopped off because of the whole racist skinhead movement that had started to seep into the scene in the late 70's. If oi! had not been tarnished by the Southall riots in Britain it is very probable that many of those bands which were getting signed by major labels would have forsaken the whole DIY ethic.

Anyhow like I stated before I am politically ambivelant, evolution will run its course and that is that. I do however, don't like it when people on the left or the right start claiming punk as its own, like its some sort of weapon in an ideological war.

If you want to see punk truly dead, than start associating it with a specific political ideology, that will kill the genre for sure!!!

So you think a minority male born in an inner city (in the United States) with a broken education system, surrounded by the life styles they are surrounded by have the same access to higher education and prosperity as a white male from a suburban area (like myself) has? I think not. US culture is based around inequality, 90% of our population is competing over 10% of the US's money. The top 1% of the US population controls 40% of the US's wealth. Call me crazy but I don't think that is honestly fair. Now I really don't side with the "left" or "right" in politics because here in the US politicians that show up on the ballot are not the most qualified people to run our government, they are simply the most popular.

Well, you may not be crazy, but trying looking at this from a different perspective. 1% of the US population pays 40% of all taxes. The top 2% of wage earners contribute almost 60% of all tax revenues collected by the US Gov., which is then redistributed in a variety a social programs such as education. Also consider the billions of dollars the Feds have spent on eduction reform since LBJ's Great Society in the 1960's, and what little there is to show for it. As you've stated, it's still broken.

Yes, you can say that and be taken seriously. Not only can you do so, if you want to be taken seriously in a discussion of art you need to do so.

Let's use film as an example. It's widely accepted in critical film circles that "Birth of a Nation" is, if not the greatest film ever made, one of the best. This despite the fact that it raises all sorts of hairs on the back of your typically PC film critic; as not only were the filmmakers openly racist, but the whole point of the film was to incite racism. Or let's go in the opposite political direction; "The Battleship Potemkin" was a propaganda piece by one of the bloodiest dicatorships in human history, a regime which spread misery and genocide throughout several continents. Yet, it too is rightly regarded as a masterpiece.

To shrug off these and other artworks because they don't meet the requirements of some absurd politically correct litmus test is retarded. It's retarded because it denies the humanity of artists and offers a crass distortion of reality. Further, doing so does not lead to the growth of art but to it's retardation.

Why do you imply that the race of the individuals in these situations is somehow as important as the economic situations they were born into? Poverty is available to all races, as is the ability to escape it. Take a look at what the Jewish people managed to accomplish; they were the victims of systemic discrimination for millenia, suffered innumerable pogroms which culminated in the single greatest race-specific attrocity in human history (the holocaust).... and they not only went on to create a thriving nation in a desert, but created such prosperity while defenind their nation from endless foreign aggression.

If the success of Israel shows us anything, it's that any people can overcome adversity and achieve greatness.

Not much to be rebelling against as a right wing punk, your kinda just fitting in.

:usehead:

There is a kinder right wing punk band in sweden called Slaskfittorna i wont translate what it means but they sing about crazy and disgusting stuff.

And being part of the slow changing middle classes?!!

I'm sorry
For something I didn't do
Lynched somebody
But I don't know who
You blame me for slavery
A hundred years before I was born

Guilty of being white

I'm a convict
Of a racist crime
I've only served
19 years of my time

Guilty of being white