Auryn wrote: ↑17 Feb 2021
guitfnky wrote: ↑17 Feb 2021
but again, it’s not a political sentiment—it’s a conspiracy theory with real world consequences.
It's utterly unclear to me where the dividing line is between these 2 categories.
guitfnky wrote: ↑17 Feb 2021
not discussing the politics is the bar, but that’s not where he failed. regardless what you’re asking for comment on, you still shouldn’t be allowed to post stuff that has the potential to lead to dangerous behavior.
There is literally so much music that could be construed as 'leading to dangerous behaviour'. Everything from 'F*ck the Police' to 'Ebeneezer Goode' qualifies...
guitfnky wrote: ↑17 Feb 2021
you mentioned RATM, and I’d apply the same standard to them (even though, I personally agree with their politics in some ways)—certain songs don’t belong on a site like this.
I can't believe you'd just ban RATM man. Sheesh. What about Stereolab? I mean, I love me some French ladies singing a post structuralist commentary on modern society to the sound of motorik beats...
guitfnky wrote: ↑17 Feb 2021
as for the non-specificity of the lyrics, that’s hardly a good defense, IMO.
What if it had said "don't trust your leaders they tell you lies" or "ferk the government" or something generic along those lines?
1st response--drawing lines can be tough, because ultimately they're arbitrary, most of the time--even the 'you can't shout FIRE! in a crowded theater' test is arbitrary, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. in this case, I don't think it's very difficult at all. if you're putting an idea out that's been thoroughly debunked, or is based on obviously anti-scientific beliefs, then it's not really related to politics in any fundamental way. just because an idea has been co-opted for political use doesn't make it inherently political. climate change isn't inherently political either--it's just that lots of people have used it as a tool to further their own interests.
2nd response--yes, agreed, which just goes back to my first point, that these lines have to be drawn
somewhere, or else things get out of hand. the trick is finding the right spot to draw it. reasonable people can disagree on where
exactly to put it, but most would agree at
approximately where it belongs. a good test is, how many people are indifferent? the fewer people who care to have discussions like the ones people like you and I are having right now, the more likely it is that the line is in the right spot. (I'll own it--I'm a dork who enjoys this sort of discussion
) if this thread gets to 10 pages though, I'll worry.
3rd response--please don't misunderstand--I'm not talking about banning or silencing anyone. I'm just talking in terms of an internet forum for a DAW. I am not for outright banning any music whatsoever, as distasteful as it may be. but, for example, when I post my own music, I use my own best judgment about where to post it. a general music forum on KVR, Reddit, or Facebook may be perfectly appropriate, but Reasontalk is about a community of software users first, and even if the software is music-related, that doesn't mean anything that's music should automatically have a place here.
I love political music--often militantly-so. I cut my teeth on RATM and Downset, love me some Refused, and think War on Women is one of the best punk bands to come along in a long time. I just don't think a lot of their songs would belong on a site like this--but elsewhere, absolutely! but I digress--I'm not familiar with Stereolab, and now I need to address that deficiency...
4th response--I'd be totally fine with that. generic to the point where a reasonable person wouldn't know the message was anti-(insert established scientific field here) would absolutely be fine, IMO. I do this a lot with my own music. most of the lyrics on Becoming Sane are very political when you know what it's about, but they're also intentionally vague, so the listener might not even realize it unless they're really looking to dissect the meaning.