Punk Rock and Conservatism: The Secret History

Brian Doherty | January 26, 2005

Ivan Osorio discusses the spiritual and historical connections between Johnny Ramone and Johnny's hero Ronald Reagan, and the mysteriously parallel roles they played in their respective movements over at the America's Future Foundation's Brainwash site. (Osorio and I played together in a punk rock band, The Jeffersons, in Gainesville, Fla. circa 1990-94.)

Comments

|1.26.05 @ 6:38PM|#

Bad link, Brian?

Brian Doherty|1.26.05 @ 6:59PM|#

For about the first 5 minutes this post was up, the link was bad. But it was then fixed.

|1.26.05 @ 7:07PM|#

Yeah, got it now, thanks. My timing was too good.

Greg Newburn|1.26.05 @ 8:11PM|#

Gainesville music rules. Too bad I got here 3 years after your band broke up.

|1.26.05 @ 9:04PM|#

ROFL punk rock and conservatism! Are you kidding me! Every punk rock group I know is liberal or leftist - NOFX, Pennywise, Bad Religion, Green Day, Strung Out, U.S. Bombs, AFI, Anti-Flag, Social Distortion, Reagan Youth, Rancid... to name a few.

And excuse me for not buying his idea that 70's rock music was not revolutionary. Honestly where does he get off with his parallels! The 70's gave us Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, The Who, Janis Joplin, Creedence Clearwater Revival... etc. etc. etc. These guys aren't "revolutionary" enough for Osorio?

|1.26.05 @ 9:56PM|#

Wow.

Yes, Johnny Ramone was one of a long line of conservative Reagan-luvin' punk rockers, such as um, Johnny Ramone and um, er... help me out here.......

Jeff|1.26.05 @ 10:20PM|#

Calling Green Day a punk band is like calling Asia a progressive band. But Mike's right, just about every micro-sliced sub-genre of music that exists today can trace it's roots back to the 70s.

|1.26.05 @ 11:43PM|#

There's some bands listed over at conservativepunk.com:

10 Sugar Charlie
Antiseen
Billy Zoom
Bottle Babies
Clean By Comparison
Destroyed By Fire
Drawback
Elite Stranger
Epstein
Final Round
Flawed
Flipperfloppers
Gotham Road
Ivy League
Luck Of The Draw
My Greatest Romance
Nation Of Suspects
Neverready
Nineball
Saturday Action Theatre
Smart Bombs And Apple Pie
The Tradition
This Wanting
Undead

I haven't heard of most of these bands though, and as everyone knows, these days you're not punk rock without a major label contract.

|1.26.05 @ 11:52PM|#

Going through some of the band sites above I noticed that Antiseen's site links Reason under their other cool links section.
http://www.antiseen.com/links.html

|1.27.05 @ 12:03AM|#

There's old school punk-Ramones, Clash, and the Sex Pistols. Some punk bands morphed into New Wave. And then there are the bands that Mike mentions that are also called punk, but sound very different to me- not too punky at all. But I don't like em and so don't know much about them.

I'm going to order a Ramones shirt but I would never wear a Clash shirt because of their leftist sentiments. Although some of their tunes were great-like; Should I Stay or Should I Go. OK, time to play a couple of Ramones tunes. Oh hey; does anyone else notice the beach music influence in the Ramones? The only other punk, band where I've noticed it is Plastic Bertrand, the band from Belgium, in their song; Ca Plane Pour Moi.

|1.27.05 @ 12:13AM|#

Just when I thought it couldn't get better...
http://rightgoths.com/

"Welcome to the online headquarters for Conservatives & Libertarians in the Goth community. This site is devoted to providing the latest in commentary and discussion about politics, style, and music as well as providing a forum for creative writing.
Goths come in all political persuasions - however no site has yet been dedicated for those of a mainstream-right-wing (i.e., anti-racist, pro-small goverment) bent. This site intends to rectify that problem."

|1.27.05 @ 12:48AM|#

OK, chtus, I said PUNK - those bands are punk? ...Why in my day.....

That list is like equating Billie Holiday and Britney Spears...
Come to think of it - Britney could very well be the right's next big diva - say, a musical Ann Coulter if you will...

|1.27.05 @ 1:07AM|#

Billy Zoom is the former guitarist of X.
http://www.billyzoom.com/credits/xcredits.html

|1.27.05 @ 1:14AM|#

...not to say that Bad Religion etc. are not punk, just a very different punk from old school punk.

|1.27.05 @ 1:26AM|#

Anybody remember straight-edge? Back in the 80's they were into NOT doing drugs, NOT drinking, and NOT having casual sex. They weren't necessarily Republicans, but they didn't want to be like the spoiled hippy baby boomers. It should be no suprise that there are conservative punks today. Liberials run (ruin) the music industry. Bill Clinton (the king of the baby boomers) set a fine example of what to rebel against. By the way, it was hard being a punk in west-central Illinois in the early 80's. The popularity of grunge kind of proved me right.

|1.27.05 @ 1:33AM|#

Rick,

I may be showing my not-so-old age, but I'd give Bad Religion an old school punk label, at least their '80-'85 stuff. They did clean their sound up a lot after that and it doesn't have the same feel. I'm not sure if your cutoff is by year or by sound, but Social Distortion might garner a consideration.

And droogy, I forgot to mention this above, but your back-in-the-day pass might get revoked for failing to recognize an original X member's name. You can of course claim a drunken/drug induced stupor on appeal.

|1.27.05 @ 1:36AM|#

Right Punk, Right Goth, Right on! Let freedom sing! Limit taxes-Promote capitalism! Power to the Individual!

|1.27.05 @ 1:43AM|#

chthus,

And I may be showing my older age. I'll take your advice and check out Bad Religion 80-85, and also Social Distortion.

|1.27.05 @ 2:07AM|#

I wish I could blame drugs or alcohol missing that name in the list, but really it's just my eyesight failing in my old age...

And Pleeezee -the Liberials run the music industry??? It's all about the money baby - and if crap sells - that's what we get to hear in a capitalist oligarchy.
But Liberial is such a co-opted term these days, the meaning has been completely twisted by conservatives. But I don't buy the bullshit. I consider myself a liberial but I BC and I would see eye to eye about 1/8 of the time. If that. But then again, I'm not a baby-boomer...

|1.27.05 @ 5:40AM|#

I saw the best minds of my generation
listening to some crap called punk
and as they came into their forties
pretending it was all something more
than the Archies run through a Marshall stack
throw in some heroin on the side

zeus! hera! you were right!

|1.27.05 @ 6:41AM|#

And excuse me for not buying his idea that 70's rock music was not revolutionary. Honestly where does he get off with his parallels! The 70's gave us Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, The Who, Janis Joplin, Creedence Clearwater Revival... etc. etc. etc. These guys aren't "revolutionary" enough for Osorio?

Maybe I should have paid more attention in rock history class, but I could swear that the 60s gave us all those bands listed (and the 70s promptly took away Hendrix and Joplin).

Matt|1.27.05 @ 8:35AM|#

The comment about straightedge hardcore above reminds me that the real ideological dichotomy in punk isn't between right or left (those exotic right-wing punk bands notwithstanding), but between hedonism (Ramones, Sex Pistols, etc.) and asceticism (Fugazi and their disciples).

Basically, every kid wants to piss off his parents, and how he goes about doing that depends on whether his parents are tight-ass suburban corporate tools or slack-ass suburban ex-hippies.

gaius marius|1.27.05 @ 9:59AM|#

They weren't necessarily Republicans, but they didn't want to be like the spoiled hippy baby boomers.

i think there is obvious common ground between libertarianism (not conservatism) and punk -- the total emancipation of the individual from any social structure/"repression". the common undercurrent is nihilism. punk was the obvious reaction against the communitarian sixties ethic. like libertarianism, it almost had to happen.

and, like libertarianism, it was diluted and mainstreamed into the punk-pop crap listed above. punk mainstreamed is called sum 41; libertarianism mainstreamed is lumped under republican.

johnny ramone, it must be said, was no political genius. this praiseful wash times bit makes him sound like a simplistic limbaugh drone.

fwiw, mr matt, i see the asceticism of fugazi, et al, as a reaction against that mainstreaming more than anything. the folks i know who would die for fugazi could mostly give a fuck what they're parents think -- individualism mostly killed that instinct -- their concern is not being a fan of anything mainstream.

ranger|1.27.05 @ 10:12AM|#

and, like libertarianism, it was diluted and mainstreamed into the punk-pop crap listed above. punk mainstreamed is called sum 41; libertarianism mainstreamed is lumped under republican.

You know, I think that sums it up brilliantly!

Fugazi very much carried on the themes from Minor Threat (same lead singer btw), just without being explicitly "straight edge". It was a band whose message was extremely individualistic. Not really a right v. left thing, more of a "do your own thing".

To chime in on Bad Religion, they've got their roots in "old" punk and have managed to stick around and survive a few radio hits or two. They and Henry Rollins have had a wierd sort of transformation where they've managed to maintain some relevancy while teasing mainstream acceptance. Both Rollins and Bad Religion fall into the "classical liberal" camp, IMHO. They also seem to be of the "trust noone" mindset which is why you didn't exactly see them lining up at campaign rallies (although Bad Religion did support the punkvoter crowd).

gaius marius|1.27.05 @ 10:23AM|#

the brainwashed article stopped short of the obvious question: what happens when punk is complex, indulgent, and decadent -- a la dismemberment plan or aywkubttod (whose name even manages to be indugent)?

time for a revival of a more utilitarian ethic? or (as i would suspect) a revolt into mythos? and is that what we're seeing in the rise of this godrock shit?

Jesse Walker|1.27.05 @ 10:40AM|#

When it comes to punk, you can't get more old-school than the first Modern Lovers album, and it's filled with odes to the '50s, the suburbs, and avoiding drugs. (OK, and to masturbation too.)

Also, while I certainly wouldn't consider the Sex Pistols conservative, a band whose most famous album includes an anticommunist song and an antiabortion song isn't conventionally leftist either.

Oh, and Douglas: "the Archies run through a Marshall stack" is a damn good description of the Ramones' sound. Thing is, "the Archies run through a Marshall stack" sounds good to me...

Perry|1.27.05 @ 10:49AM|#

Brian - were you a Gator? Unfortunately, I got there two years after you guys split.

Matt|1.27.05 @ 10:52AM|#

"what happens when punk is complex, indulgent, and decadent -- a la dismemberment plan or aywkubttod (whose name even manages to be indugent)?"

I'd argue that Fugazi were the ones who made it okay for punk to be complex, and the next phase will be a reaction against their elliptical structures and ascetic PC preachiness in favor of big riffs and ironic macho posturing. The example that springs to mind is the Rye Coalition, whom I like very much. I'm told (I'm too old to hear this stuff firsthand anymore) they were of the Hose Got Cable, Dismemberment Plan, etc. post-Fugazi school until they had some conversion experience and now they sound like Fugazi playing AC/DC songs. (That's a good thing, by the way) Lots of songs about driving around, getting wasted, and getting laid.

So I suspect that the revival is going to be less utilitarian than bombastic.

|1.27.05 @ 10:52AM|#

"Murphy's Law" was a Reagan-loving punk band in the 80s.

"I like Ronald Reagan
Hope you like him too
If we can't have anarchy
Republicans will do."

Of course, the lead singer named himself "Jimmy Gestapo."

Matt|1.27.05 @ 11:04AM|#

Murphy's Law brings us back to my thesis about asceticism vs. hedonism - they were mostly a parodic foil to the left-leaning aescetic culture of punk.

Punk had gotten so preachy and PC by then that it was actually considered, within the culture, somehow novel that a rock band would be really into smoking weed.

gaius marius|1.27.05 @ 11:11AM|#

that's interesting, mr matt. i used to see rye coalition at the empty bottle once in a while, back when they were still of that post-fugazi school. maybe i should d/l something newer of theirs.

it's futile, though, isn't it, to try to go back to that ramones simplicity? it will always be hollow and derivative now -- and we get it constantly, with interpol trying to be joy division or yet another beatles revival or with us maple simply attempting to be inscrutible. sometimes it seems the entire genre has become homage. i think the mainstreaming and the pretentiousness ultimately spell "played out".

Matt|1.27.05 @ 11:26AM|#

"it's futile, though, isn't it, to try to go back to that ramones simplicity?"

Right. Totally. Which is why indulgence is the next frontier.

|1.27.05 @ 11:40AM|#

None dare call it the Jefferson's, eh? Ah, Lamesville, the Hardback, etc.

Conservatives are a tiny, insignificant minority of punk. For every one rightish band you can name, I can name 100 leftish ones.

Even when Rye were playing house shows - and I love their Troubleman records - they were just another mid-90s post-Nation of Ulysses image-obsessed hardcore band - no real substance, despite a song called "Great Communicator". Ralph told me back in 96 or so that they were trying to sound like the Jesus Lizard. They haven't grown that much in 9 years.

Yaal forgot about the FUs. Young! Fast! Iranians!

gaius marius|1.27.05 @ 11:44AM|#

how much more indulgent than trail of dead and d-plan can we get, do you think? (i remember wondering this when i first heard "baudelaire"....) radiohead in the late 1990s really hammered home to me how the descendents of punk were going over the top, recreating prog, and that's been confirmed by a lot of what i've been exposed to since.

or do you simply mean the base venality of hotel-room trashing and pose-striking, etc?

Matt|1.27.05 @ 11:57AM|#

The indulgence of the prog revival is the opposite of what I have in mind. So yeah - maybe "base venality" is what I see coming down the pike. Either that or accordions.

But I'm not suggesting that I see any bright, creative future for punk rock as such - I think it's probably gone through so many Oedipal cycles of reaction and counter-reaction that there's not much left to do. We may agree on this, if I read your comments correctly.

|1.27.05 @ 12:06PM|#

Punk is about extremes, and sure people get into it because they like the sound, but the people who *really* get into it (i.e. the people still following this thread) tend to have extreme personalities, and it's rare to find a hedonist who wasn't once an aescetic, and vice-versa.

As is common, I was once Xstraight-edgeX, but then became an unabashed hedonist. I also went from being a libertarian to an anarchist to a leftist who believes we need a controllable State to ensure that private power doesn't run amok. Such transitions are typical in people who are devoted to a subculture - going from extreme to extreme without trying to fit in the wishy-washy middle.

|1.27.05 @ 12:10PM|#

It's a minority, yes, but still some good tunes ...

Minor Threat - "Guilty of Being White"
Circle Jerks - "Red Tape" and "When the Shit Hits the Fan"

I could think of more but my rage is boiling over.

gaius marius|1.27.05 @ 12:11PM|#

we do.

what comes after the bombast, then, i wonder? the ever-growing dark spectre of christian rock makes me fear for a future digressing into the romantic mysticism that functions so profitably in pop lit.

|1.27.05 @ 12:27PM|#

i'm late to the thread, but FWIW, Poster Children - http://www.posterchildren.com - are one of the big influences that turned me to libertarian/individualist thinking. Computer programmers and very DIY Fugazi/Minutemen disciples, at least ethically. Despite them being Nader types now, I still love the quote from the first thing I read about 'em: "Being American is being able to do what I want!"

Did I mention that they rock? No? They do, and they're the best live band I've ever seen. They have free videos on the site.

fyodor|1.27.05 @ 1:02PM|#

Mike,

Maybe someone's addressed this already and I missed it with my skimming, but, while I agree that it's preposterous to make such dismissive generalizations about the 70's, every one of the bands you associate with the 70's actually started in the 60's. And I don't mean just formed in the 60's but had their first recordings (more than one in each case) in the 60's. In fact, as we all know, Hendrix and Joplin barely made it out of the 60's. Not sure what it means, except that I'm not sure what your examples mean.

fyodor|1.27.05 @ 1:03PM|#

Peter James Bond,

You need to be sedated!!! :-)

|1.27.05 @ 1:09PM|#

Sounds good, what've you got?

Matt|1.27.05 @ 1:13PM|#

Gaius -
I'm intrigued by your scary, scary vision, but still unclear on the details. Are you worried that the moribund punk ethos will itself evolve into romantic mysticism, or just that mysticism will grow in parallel as its own cultural phenomenon?

And h�sn't �dolescent rom�ntic mysticism �lready run its course in the form of he�vy met�l? And since Christian rock probably doesn't share the same Nietzschean core, what would its relationship be to Ur-metal? And just why am I asking these things instead of working?

A loving, merciful God has been kind enough to isolate me from Christian rock, so I can't even spin my typical half-informed BS as to its musical and ideological heritage. You, on the other hand, have obviously lost some sleep over its encroaching menace, so lay your data on us.

Matt|1.27.05 @ 1:26PM|#

...and will I wake up tomorrow to see "Punks not moribund!" on the side of my car?

|1.27.05 @ 2:11PM|#

the real question being whether gaius is familiar with Current 93.

|1.27.05 @ 3:01PM|#

Punk generally follows into two main groups. Iconoclasts and Poseurs. Most of the 70's punk movement were iconoclastic pure and simple. In Britain (where the movement actually began) it was not so much an appeal against hippyness as a means of protest against the urban environment they came from. Like Rap, Punk came from the slums. It was often political, but rarely endorsed any active political movement. Most intelligent punk leaned toward anarchy.

|1.27.05 @ 3:02PM|#

Perhaps in the sense that gaius considers the year 93 CE to be current.

;-)

|1.27.05 @ 3:32PM|#

Josephus,

Marius would say 846 years since the founding of the city or he would mention the consuls of that year but he would never mention your Christian Era.

QFMC cos. V

|1.27.05 @ 3:34PM|#

Sorry Munk, but punk did NOT start in Britain - it started in the USA. Read Please Kill Me if you doubt.

The Ramones and Stooges were playing long before the Clash and the Pistols. Malcolm McLaren, who put together both of the aformentioned groups, even managed the New York Dolls, another US proto-punk outfit.

|1.27.05 @ 7:34PM|#

PJB is right about punk being a US thang first. The Stooges, and before them MC5 and various proto-punk garage rockers (check your Nuggets collections) were precursors, but so were proggish outfits such as The Velvets, at whose feet the art-rockiness of any punk outfit that "matures" should probably be laid. The Dolls sounded punk, but dressed glam, and Joey Ramone was in glam bands before the Ramones. Divisions between sub-genres were more fluid BITD.

The Brits' punk movement had their own rivulets feeding the main channel of punk, especially the pub rockers like Brinsley Schwartz, Ducks Deluxe and Dr. Feelgood. Playing rockabilly, R&B and boogie tunes was a reaction to Corporate Whore rock, doodly-doodly ELP crap, and glam. Some of the UK groups with a sense of humor - something almost always fatal for US pop - added to the stew. I'm thinking of 10cc and Sparks.

Rubber Bullets may have been the best 45 of the 70's.

Kevin

Brian Doherty|1.27.05 @ 8:05PM|#

Kevrob--The Mael Bros. of Sparks are as American as old Apple Pie, my friend. Hendrix-style, they had to head to Britain to get recognition and props.

|1.28.05 @ 2:33AM|#

Brian, to quote the late Johnny Carson, "I did not know that."

So who'd win a Battle of The Bands faceoff: Sparks or Cheap Trick?

Kevin

|1.28.05 @ 4:35PM|#

I'll contend that Iggy and NYDolls came first but I don't (personally) consider them punk anymore than Alice Cooper. In the same way, they paved the way to punk and lacking any other "genre" at the time, I suppose punk satisfies most. Pre-punk garage rock is a little more accurate though. Just to be contrary, I think the Ramones made rock music. Not punk. Oh yeah, and the first punk single was by the Damned followed closely by the Ramones and SP's. (and what's more punk than getting signed, right?)