Punk rock

Politically Incorrect Punk

When the punk rock thought police ruled the scene

|

In September 1984, the widely read punk zine Maximum Rocknroll published its review of Victim in Pain, the debut album by a New York City band called Agnostic Front.

"I'm approaching this band with caution," it warned. "Unfortunately, much of the narrow-mindedness, fanatical nationalism, and violence that has destroyed the New York punk scene seems to have revolved around AGNOSTIC FRONT."

The author of that review was the publication's founder and editor, Tim Yohannan, a 40-something ex-Yippie who thought punk music should march in lockstep with left-wing politics. As Ray Farrell, a punk veteran who once worked at the independent record label SST (run by Black Flag guitarist Greg Ginn), told Steven Blush, author of American Hardcore: A Tribal History, "there was an ideological development at Maximum RockNRoll, making everything move towards a Socialist bent."

In effect, Yohannan appointed himself as the grand inquisitor of the punk rock thought police, scouring the scene for any signs of deviation from the lefty script. "If it's just 'good sounding' music you want," he admonished readers in the March 1985 issue, "then punk is no alternative at all. For me, what makes punk different is the intelligence and commitment behind it."

Agnostic Front quickly became one of Yohannan's primary targets. In one 1984 column, he claimed "the N.Y. Skins apparently have embraced the British National Front's racist and nationalist attitudes." He rarely missed the opportunity to depict the band's members and their friends as goose-stepping goons.

This August, Agnostic Front singer Roger Miret published a new memoir that tells his side of the story.

"A writer for this crappy but influential fanzine, Maximumrocknroll, started talking shit about us and calling us a bunch of fascist skinheads," Miret writes in My Riot: Agnostic Front, Grits, Guts & Glory (co-authored with journalist Jon Wiederhorn). "The crazy thing about Timmy calling me a fascist is that I was an immigrant Latino kid dating a Jewish girl, and she never accused me of being a Nazi sympathizer."

But because his band had the nerve to occasionally dissent from left-wing tenets, it drew the ire of the powers in punk at the time. Nor was Agnostic Front the only band to run afoul of Yohannan's insistence on ideological purity.

Born in Cuba in 1964, Miret came to the U.S. as a young child after his parents fled the Castro regime. He grew up rough in "the slums of New Jersey towns like Passaic and Paterson." From there he found his way to Manhattan, where the loud, fast sounds of bands such as the Stimulators, Reagan Youth, and Even Worse were blaring out of clubs such as Max's Kansas City, A7, and CBGB.

Miret's life changed forever when he saw the Bad Brains play in 1981. It was an "inspiring" and "absolutely mind-blowing" experience, he writes. "They played faster than anyone and still sounded tight and furious."

Kenneth Salerno

The aggressive music attracted a wild crowd. John Joseph, the singer for NYC legends the Cro-Mags, once remembered that "at a Black Flag show I was sent flying across the dance floor by none other than the late John Belushi, who was a huge punk/hardcore fan and was at a lot of the early shows." As Joseph explained in his memoir, The Evolution of a Cro-Magnon, Belushi "was a big dude and when he slammed his way across the dance floor you'd just see bodies going airborne."

Miret slammed his way around the scene for a couple of years before joining Agnostic Front in 1983. "Some people think we were all lowlifes who wanted to kick the shit out of each other. That couldn't be further from the truth," he writes in My Riot. "We hung out together and supported each other. The more popular bands helped get gigs for groups that were less known, and some helped other bands put out their own records."

Agnostic Front has "never put down any other races or ethnicities," Miret insists. "From the start we welcomed anyone who wanted to be a part of what we were doing. I was Cuban for Christ's sake—far from the image of the blond-haired, blue-eyed Aryan Übermensch."

Unlike some punk acts, Agnostic Front didn't offer any sort of coherent political message. But the band did sometimes express right-of-center views in songs and interviews. The 1986 track "Public Assistance," for example, was a harsh attack on the welfare state. Sample lyric: "Uncle Sam takes half my pay so you can live for free."

Miret didn't write those lyrics. He outsourced the job to Peter Steele, the leader of the Brooklyn metal act Carnivore, who would later go on to fame as the frontman for goth-rockers Type O Negative. But Miret stands firmly behind the sentiment. "I was a minority kid whose mom was on welfare and I saw all the time how other people in our neighborhood abused the system," he writes in My Riot. "Public assistance was designed to help people better their lives and move on, not to enable the families that used it. Those are the people the song was aimed at."

Miret and his bandmates also voiced support for President Ronald Reagan's foreign policy. "We have to stop Communist aggression," guitarist Vinnie Stigma told the zine Guillotine in 1984. "I think [Reagan] has guts," Miret later added. Statements like that ruffled a few mohawks.

Miret has nothing but contempt for those "privileged, politically correct" punks that slandered his name. Did Agnostic Front sometimes promote conservative opinions? Yes. But were they fascists? Nazis? Not unless those terms are drained of all meaning and used to smear any right-of-center point of view.

"To say Agnostic Front were a bunch of Nazis in a skinhead gang was ridiculous," Youth of Today guitarist John Porcelly once told the journalist Tony Rettman. "I was there, and no one united NYHC [a moniker for the New York hardcore scene] like Roger Miret. I used to tell Tim Yohannan what great guys [Agnostic Front] were. He would never believe me."

The freakout over Agnostic Front's politically incorrect punk came to a head when Miret, Stigma, and bassist Rob Kabula agreed to be interviewed for Maximum Rocknroll's January 1985 issue by punker Dave Scott.

Scott sent his questions by mail and the band sent back their answers. But Yohannan thought the interview was too friendly, so he mailed a batch of his own questions, focusing on the "disturbing aspects to these nice guys' philosophies" and "their admittedly nationalistic outlook." Miret, Stigma, and Kabula replied again.

Yohannan then edited the whole correspondence together, littering the Q&A with a final round of his own commentary. He literally gave himself the last word on his most contentious exchanges with the band.

It was an ugly and heavy-handed piece of work. Yohannan had revealed his own intellectual insecurities by doing everything in his power to stack the deck in his favor. He clearly did not trust his subscribers to read the original interviews and then make up their own minds. Even left-wing punks were embarrassed by the performance.

Agnostic Front

Regrettably, echoes of Yohannan's approach can still be heard today. When Rettman's great oral history, NYHC: New York Hardcore 1980–1990, was published in 2014, New Yorker critic Kelefa Sanneh took a cheap shot at Agnostic Front that came straight out of the Maximum Rocknroll playbook. "Agnostic Front all but dared listeners to assume the worst, and Yohannan wasn't the only one who did," Sanneh wrote. "Agnostic Front shows attracted a certain number of white-power partisans, and the band occasionally had to pause, mid-set, to censure an audience member for Sieg-Heiling in the pit."

I've been attending punk, hardcore, and metal shows since the age of 12, and I've encountered white-power partisans in a variety of locations, including performances by the multi-racial ska punks the Mighty Mighty Bosstones; the multi-racial post-hardcore group Orange 9MM; the multi-racial rap-rockers Rage Against the Machine; and the multi-racial death metal outfit Suffocation. None of those bands "dared listeners to assume the worst," yet the Nazi wannabes still showed up. The reason is that racist thugs don't care what band happens to be playing on a given night. They come out to cause trouble while aggressive music plays in the background.

Around 1994, the great New York City hardcore punk band Murphy's Law played a show I attended in Tampa, Florida. Much like Agnostic Front, the members of Murphy's Law had had their names dragged through the mud by Maximum Rocknroll back in the '80s. Murphy's Law singer Jimmy Drescher has described the zine's handiwork as "left-wing yellow journalism."

I saw a whole lot of neo-Nazi boneheads at that show. The band had to cut the music after a few songs because the racists were punching and bullying smaller kids in the pit. Then one of the fascists took a swing at Drescher. That led to a massive fight in which Drescher and his bandmates sent several of the neo-Nazis to the hospital. When it was all over, Murphy's Law got back on stage and finished playing its set.

Miret recounts similar anti-fascist exploits at Agnostic Front shows. "All hell broke loose" one night in Allentown, Pennsylvania, he recalls, when "hundreds of guys came to the concert with swastika flags." After a group of fascists attacked a black audience member, the place exploded. "The fighting spilled onstage and backstage," Miret writes. "Vinnie broke apart the mic stands and handed out pieces of metal to everyone backstage to crack some [Nazi] heads. He was like a general sending his troops out to battle."

New York hardcore may not have been sufficiently left-wing for Maximum Rocknroll, but that didn't stop New York hardcore musicians from being antifa before antifa was cool.

Today, Agnostic Front's debut album is justly recognized as a genre landmark. When Victim in Pain turned 25 in 2009, The Village Voice said it "deserves to be ranked within a stage dive's distance of Velvet Underground and Ramones classics on any list of important and influential New York records."

Speaking of the Ramones, that band's guitarist, Johnny Ramone, liked to describe himself as a "Nixon Republican." When the Ramones were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2002, Johnny concluded his acceptance speech with the words "God bless President Bush." According to the scolds at Maximum Rocknroll, that puts him on the wrong side of punk rock history.

But if a founding member and principal songwriter for one of the greatest punk bands of all time can't pass your punk rock purity test, it might just prove that the test itself is total bullshit.

NEXT: DEA Raids California Pain Doctor Featured in a Reason TV Video

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. In my opinion, the Sex Pistols “Anarchy in the UK” and “God Save the Queen” were critcisms of the British welfare state. Other British punkers also took shots at the British system, such as the Clash.
    From what I remember of the late 1970s, British punk rock was a rebellion of the youth who saw little prospects for improving their lot in life in the British welfare state.

    1. Could be. But I’ve noticed a lot of critics of any current government only despise what it hasn’t done for them. They spit on the redistribution system only because it hasn’t redistributed in their favor.

      I don’t think it’s a conscious “gimme gimme gimme” attitude. More that they grew up with it and don’t realize what it actually is or how it redistributes. They have nothing to compare it to. They just think it’s not fair (which is true) and want it rejiggered to be “more fair” (which it can’t be).

      My fantasy world would have no central government to speak of, except possibly to define common legal terms like “threat”. I figure a lot of people, maybe most, would be members of clubs, societies, whatever they’d be called, ranging from simple insurance to as socialistic as possible without the forced taxation; they’d sign contracts to turn over their income and participate in all the association’s redistribution schemes. At their worst, people would work where the association said and all pay would go to the association. But all such associations would be bound by the fiscal reality of no coerced taxation.

      One of the primary side benefits would be the comparison of the various redistribution schemes. There would always be some fanatics yearning for “true” forced socialism, but I think most people would see how fiscal reality warps things and be satisfied with their choices, accepting loss of personal income as whatever tradeoff they voluntarily sign up for.

      1. I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

        This is what I do… http://www.onlinecareer10.com

      2. I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

        This is what I do… http://www.onlinecareer10.com

      3. I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

        This is what I do… http://www.onlinecareer10.com

    2. In a previous life, I was a humanities professor, and my life’s work was:

      Step 1. Choose pop artist
      Step 2. Choose pop artist’s biggest fan demographic
      Step 3. Explain to pop artist’s biggest fan demographic that the pop artist’s message is the antithesis of their political beliefs
      Step 4. Profit

      Also, I should have made a lot more money for that service, which is why capitalism just doesn’t work.

  2. “Your artsy isn’t fartsy enough!”

  3. Punk Rock Thought Police is the name of my industrial band

  4. No doubt, non-racist skinheads were victims of a moral panic–but it’s always been that way for them, going back to their British roots. So get the crucified skinhead tattoo. It’s part of the experience. Shows could be violent as hell.

    It’s hard for people nowadays to understand what it was like before the internet, when there was an underground. The media wasn’t broadcasting it on the radio–and people in the scene weren’t learning about it by reading about it in a magazine either.

    Agnostic Front and the Cro-Mags were more influential than Maximum Rock and Roll–because the scene happened at shows, not in a magazine. Reading magazines from the time is probably more influential on the way things are remembered, but that wasn’t so at the time. Magazines were for fan girls and people who didn’t go to shows.

    People found out about bands and the scene by going to shows, fan girls circulating tapes, and word of mouth. People knew what various flavors of skinheads were about because they knew skinheads. They were friends you’d grown up with, guys you knew from high school, people you’d socialize with at shows. Maximum Rock & Roll didn’t influence the perception of the scene–not inside the scene.

    1. It’s hard for people nowadays to understand what it was like before the internet, when there was an underground. The media wasn’t broadcasting it on the radio–and people in the scene weren’t learning about it by reading about it in a magazine either.

      I did. I don’t remember whether it was in Reason or Libertarian Review, and I think it was too early to have been Jesse Walker, but in 1980 one of them had a cover story, “Punk: Anarcy Rock?” that intrigued me, so I had to find out about it, which I was able to do via friends of a libertarian friend. I didn’t go to a lot of concerts, just a few stretched over several yrs., never got a tattoo or a mohawk or a leather vest, but I did learn & enjoy. That’s also how I got introduced to WFMU, because at least some of that stuff could be aired (plus it was a relatively deregulatory FCC era re content, in some ways not fully heard again even now) and it was being done so by Pat Duncan, Frank O’Toole, & a few others. I’ve been a WFMU listener ever since, to where they became my default station to listen to, liking more programs than I dislike, which is amazing considering their enormous variety. I turned off Michael Shelley to listen to Larry Kudlow now, though.

      But yeah, Maximum Rock & Roll was just one of several sources those who cared read, and nobody took seriously their editorial stance unless it was the same as their own.

    2. Magazines were for fan girls and people who didn’t go to shows.

      No, they had show listings too. But they weren’t very reliable (lots of cancell’ns after press time) and not as up to date as what you could find out about on the radio or by word of mouth.

  5. There’s something about archiving that scene that can never get it right. Part of it is that the scene was about being there. It wasn’t about the recordings. It was about the shows. Judging it or the bands or the people at gigs by the recordings or the ‘zine coverage is like judging an opera by its set design in relation to paintings in a museum. Recordings and print weren’t even the medium.

    Video of the performances doesn’t even capture it–because that was only part of it. Video of the audience during the shows gets about as close to it as you can.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6BuoXNGbMg

    The art form was the gig. The medium was the gig + the audience. You had to be there to experience it. It isn’t just the difference between reading about a football game and watching it. It isn’t just the difference between watching it on TV and being there. It’s also the difference between being a spectator and playing the game yourself.

    What it meant to the people who were there in the audience couldn’t show up in a magazine, and it’s strange if the way people understand that scene today is heavily influenced by what people wrote about it at the time. You had to be there. If you experienced it, you were a participant in something that required your presence. It’s not like putting on headphone and listening to an REM record. It’s not about explaining it to a reading audience that wasn’t there.

    1. A few seasons ago for a short while there was a 1-hr. program on WFMU that I had to consider the ultimate in poseur-dom. It was DJd by a young guy who played punk recordings from that era, mixed in w a recent covers & pastiches of the style. And it wasn’t supposed to be campy! I enjoyed listening to it, but the idea he had that this was to stimulate a new punk generation was just ridiculous. The whole point of punk was independence; imitating their forebears was the farthest thing from their minds at the time, so how was that supposed to work now?

    2. Part of it is that the scene was about being there. It wasn’t about the recordings. It was about the shows. Judging it or the bands or the people at gigs by the recordings or the ‘zine coverage is like judging an opera by its set design in relation to paintings in a museum. Recordings and print weren’t even the medium.

      That sells punk incredibly short of its influence, from literature to whatever. While music was the most visible medium, it wasn’t the only one.

      If anything, punk was about creating your own culture, the whole DIY ethic, and often times grinning at how that clashed with the status quo. Whatever. Every rebellion becomes orthodoxy at some point, with a new group of kids telling you you are full of shit.

      While Agnostic Front were obvious victims of of the punk aesthetic popular at the time, their shows certainly did attract a large majority of people with a similar view. At one show, I was the only person in the pit with hair.

      Guilt by association is pretty weak, but let’s not deny the association was there.

      1. Judging the it by the records or what the magazines at the time said is selling it short.

        Judging Agnostic Front as a band and their fans by comparing their records to Pink Floyd’s is to completely miss the point. It wasn’t about that.

        Pink Floyd’s music was meant to be recorded. The recording was their ultimate product. The recording was meant to be listened to. The effects were meant to be appreciated on a stereo or with headphones. Agnostic Front wasn’t like that. That any of their music was ever captured on a recording was amazing.

        The best things punk rock and hardcore bands did were never recorded–and weren’t meant to be.

        Looking to what magazines wrote about Agnostic Front as if that were somehow representative of what they or their shows were about or meant to them and their audience is to completely miss the point, too–but at least show reviews are on topic.

        The most authentic aspect of punk rawk/hardcore was the lived experience of it. You had to be there–or you have no context within which to judge that lived experience.

        You certainly can’t listen to the records, watch the videos, read the magazines, and think that you’ve experienced it.

      2. Imagine a woman who is the world’s greatest authority on how the brain perceives and stores sensory information. Imagine no one knows more about it than she does. She’s also the world’s greatest authority on optical physics. Except imagine for a moment that she’s more than that–imagine that there isn’t anything ABOUT optical physics or perception that can be known that she doesn’t know.

        There is one caveat–she’s been color blind from birth. She’s never seen a color in her life. It’s all in shades of gray.

        The question was then put to us about whether she really knows what she’s talking about when she talks about the color “red”. She may know everything about how the brain perceives it, and she may know everything objective there is to know about the color red–but if she’s never seen the color red, how can she really KNOW what she’s talking about?

        People who write words in magazines ABOUT something and people who’ve listened to the recordings are like that optical physicist. They may know everything there is to know ABOUT Agnostic Front–but if they didn’t experience it themselves in the way it was intended, they’re judging it by some bizarre context. It’s like judging an album by the cover art. That’s not what it was about.

        Agnostic Front would still have been an amazing hardcore band–even if they’d never made a single record. And that’s because of their shows. That was their art, and it needs to be judged in that context.

        1. Oh goodie, an epistemology pissing match on one of the most inconsequential topics ever. You wouldn’t be an academic by chance? You sound like a deadhead grumbling about those people who attend dead shows just because they like a few songs.

          I see you missed the part of me being there as well.

          And beyond the binary choice of the totality of hardcore being judged by either shows or magazine (none of which I said), there’s this

          That was their art, and it needs to be judged in that context.

          Unfortunately, Agnostic Front did release albums, conducted interviews, and have now a book.

          Perhaps you should set them straight on how they should conduct themselves, speaking of punk orthodoxy.

          1. Set them straight?

            Pissing contest?!

            You’re having arguments with yourself in your head.

            The point is that Maximum Rock and Roll telling the scene what they were about and why was bullshit.

            Agnostic Front had more influence on the scene than Maximum Rock and Roll, and the influence they had on the scene was mostly because of the gigs they played. The scene was gigs.

            When Agnostic Front writes a book, it should be judged against other books.

            When Maximum Rock and Roll wrote an article, the article wasn’t a gig–and the scene was gigs.

            I don’t know why you have a hard time understanding that. I don’t know why you think that’s denigrating to Agnostic Front or their recordings or any of their work.

            Judging the hardcore scene by the recordings or the magazine articles written about it is completely missing the point–when the scene was about the gigs.

            . . . no matter what arguments you’re having in your head.

            P.S. “(none of which I said)”

            You were responding to what I wrote–and completely missed the point, you idiot. That was my point–so what if it wasn’t yours? You think other people shouldn’t be allowed to talk about things unless it’s about something you wrote? . . . even when what you wrote was in response to something I wrote–and you couldn’t figure out the point?

            You’re an idiot in the technical sense–so self-absorbed, you can’t even understand what you read.

            The only pissing contest happening is in your tiny little head.

  6. I once jumped off of a high cliff into Lake Havasu. I felt nauseated while I was falling. After impact, I plunged so deep in the water, the weeds at the bottom of the lake wrapped around my ankles. It felt like something slimy was pulling me down. I hit the bottom so hard, I was afraid I might have twisted my ankle. I wasn’t sure which way was up, but then I saw some light and I knew that must be above me. I remembered I hadn’t breathed for a while.

    I saw the shimmering underside of the water at the top of the lake, and I started reaching for it. I wasn’t sure I had enough breath to make it that far, but what choice did I have but to try? When I finally breached and took a big breath, I inhaled a bunch of grainy stuff. It was like my mouth was full of pebbles. I spit them out. It was my broken teeth. The impact with the water had hit my jaw so hard that it shattered my teeth. They were locked together. My ears were ringing from their impact with the surface of the water.

    I felt exhilarated. I spit out blood and started laughing.

    Now you know what it’s like to jump off a high cliff into a lake, right?

    The correct answer is no.

  7. Punk Rock was always a joke. It was just rock and roll for people too lazy or not talented enough to learn to play their instruments. The only punk band that could actually play was the Clash and I don’t consider them to be punk. They played too many other styles of music to fairly be called punk.

    1. Ugh, John. Go listen to Marquee Moon and go to bed. I’m super disappointed in you now young man.

      1. I think that is on Rolling Stone’s list of 500 greatest songs of all time. It even beat out Kelly Clarkson’s Since U Been Gone, so you know it must be pretty good.

        In all seriousness, punk is overrated. Post-punk is underrated. I could listen to The Chameleon’s Script of the Bridge album everyday for the rest of my life.

        1. I meant the album, not the title track. Also, was your post a cut at my recommendation for not being sufficiently obscure? If so, nice hipsterism, haven’t got to see much of that lately.

          Regardless, my recommendation was aimed at the statement that punk only has people who are bad at their instruments.

          1. on a related note:

            My complaints about Biafra aside, I consider the Dead Kennedys to be pretty good songwriters.

            1. Always liked surf sounding punk, what little I heard at least. Liked Agent Orange as well. Not as familiar with that stuff.

            2. I’ve always really enjoyed East Bay Ray’s surf guitar and Danger Peligro (?)’s drumming too. Biafra’s warbling can get old, but in small doses the Dead Kennedys are great.

              Also, “punk ain’t no religious cult” pretty succinctly sums up the author’s gripe with the group think of the punk press.

          2. I’m bringing hipsterism back. Which means I’m either way behind or way in front of the curve. Maybe both

            1. Basically is hipsterism defined right there.

          3. Anyone who doubts Bad Brains’ musicianship has never tried to play that fast.

            Oh, and please give generously towards Dr. Know’s rehab

            https://goo.gl/81GJcm

            I am without words that one of the most badass guitarist can’t make his bills.

            1. “Anyone who doubts Bad Brains’ musicianship has never tried to play that fast.”

              Lol

    2. Meh, like any genre, 99% of it blows, but there’s some good shit in there.

    3. Punk Rock was always a joke. It was just rock and roll for people too lazy or not talented enough to learn to play their instruments.

      That’s not entirely true, but there is much truth to the 2nd sentence. That doesn’t make it a joke, though.

      There are things in art that when the artist gets too good at get boring. Although of course I also appreciate the refined, I go a lot for the rough & unfinished. American football’s another case in point, where I got to like minor league men’s, women’s, & children’s football better than the pros or even varsity; some of the most interesting games in the NFL were played by the scabs during a strike. Outsider art is more fun than insider art.

      Why do people listen to live recordings rather than only studio recordings, when the studio recordings are technically better? There I’m comparing not the gestalt of being there with recorded stuff, but just the imperfect (with audience stimulus/distraction) vs. the perfect on record.

      1. Agreed about football. It’s pretty rare that you see something in the big 5 sports of pro football, hockey, basketball, soccer, or baseball that would appear amazing to someone who wasn’t invested in the outcome of the game. And the enjoyability for the people invested in the outcome depends primarily on balance of competition, which can be found in equal measure at any level.

        Now in sports like tennis and even golf, you see much more amazing stuff at the pro level than among amateurs. Likewise for gymnastics, ice skating, and track and field Olympic sports.

        1. Actually even in individual sports, I’ve seen stuff that was interesting because the players weren’t that good. They’d make up for their deficiency by doing something that wouldn’t work at high level play. Like a certain tennis player who’d loose-wrist volley drop shots at the net. Or coffee-house chess play that isn’t really sound. High-level bowling’s boring because there are few interesting 2nd ball situations, often no pins to pick up at all. Boxing’s be more interesting w boxers who aren’t all-around sound.

          But yeah, when it comes to something like gymnastics or figure skating, better is better, and the best are in the circus, beyond competition. Also golf, the course is hard enough w/o the golfer’s making it harder.

          1. ” Boxing’s be more interesting w boxers who aren’t all-around sound.”

            I agree that the enthusiasm of amateur players can be very infectious. It also works with sports announcers. I like to listen to the Olympic colour commentators in the more obscure sports, weight lifting, skeet shooting etc. Unlike the networks’ usual cast of calm, cool professionals, these amateur announcers only rarely get a chance to appear and can really add to the viewer experience.

    4. Punk Rock was always a joke. It was just rock and roll for people too lazy or not talented enough to learn to play their instruments.

      outside of Anglosphere, there are some exceptions. See e.g. La Polla Records (Basque).

      of course, “no true Scotsman” can always be applied.

  8. I read Miret’s book last week. I enjoyed it.

  9. I never heard of Agnostic Front. Guess I never had to tell them to get off my lawn.

    1. I never heard of Agnostic Front.

      Seriously?

    2. It’s not possible to determine whether they existed or not, so who cares.

    3. Like with most punk, you didn’t miss much.

    4. I might like their music, but can’t say for sure.

  10. There’s a cartoon frame from that era, don’t remember where I saw it, showing a punk performer being dragged away screaming, “Whaddaya mean, not politically correct? Aaaaa!”

  11. and the multi-racial death metal outfit Suffocation.

    The drummer in that band is, literally, STEVE SMITH. Great act. They’re Death Metal though. Metal has it’s own Nazi asshole problem too unfortunately.

    I got into punk when I was a boy. Was a young kid during rise of Pop-Punk, Green Day, Warped Tour type stuff. Got into harder older stuff. Still listen to bullshit new noise genres and such. And even when I was kid I could never understand this seeming contradiction of extreme anti-authoritarianism associated with the music and the common Marxist views. I still don’t get it.

    Oh well. Maybe it was just the zine making it all up. That is my hope.

    1. I guess it depends on what you define as a problem.

      Metal has nazis, but I’m not sure they’re a massive problem. NSBM is a niche within a niche, and has always been looked at slightly askew by the broader black metal fandom.

      Nazis get their say, and are typically sent back to their corner one they’ve had it.

      1. They’re just always there though. And it’s annoying, you go to a lot of extreme metal concerts and you’ll see the type pretty frequently. True hardcore modern NSBM is pretty underground still, but most black metal I see owes some of their lineage to the Burzum/Mayhem crew. And there is a definitive racist element to them, Varg most famously.

        1. Though, i feel like the problem is exaggerated by outside commentators. That AV Club article about Nazism in metal was just insipid. The vast majority of people are there to have fun, then of the political ones the NS ones are pretty small.

          1. I definitely agree. Though, it’s worth pointing out that while Varg is a bad guy who did bad things, Burzum’s lyrics are entirely apolitical, unless you count Scandinavian navel-gazing about vikings political. Any overtly racist following Burzum has has more to do with a cult of personality around Varg rather than the music per se.

            1. Sure, I can’t understand what they’re saying most of the time anyway, and they’re screaming in Norwegian just to make it harder. I don’t care much about lyrics most of the time anyway. Except Iced Earth’s Glorious Burden. I think that entire album should be made the USA’s national anthem.

    2. Mike Smith WAS the drummer. Steven B. Smith (drummers and Journey fans know him as THE STEVE SMITH) has never played punk, hardcore, or death metal; although I have no reason to believe he couldn’t absolutely dominate those genres as well.

  12. I don’t see anything surprising in a writer criticizing a band who supported Reagan and his anti-communist crusade. Back in 1984 things were heating up in South Africa and Reagan supported the white regime. It was a big issue with American young people, most of whom found themselves on the opposite side of their government, supporting the terrorists and the communists.

    1. I remember some people who liked communism once. Those were the days.

      1. “I remember some people who liked communism once. ”

        Communists and terrorists once opposed the apartheid regime. More than we can say about Reagan or Reason.

        1. So, you’ve been to school
          For a year or two
          And you know you’ve seen it all
          In daddy’s car
          Thinking you’ll go far
          Back east your type don’t crawl
          Playing ethnicky jazz
          To parade your snazz
          On your five-grand stereo
          Braggin’ that you know
          How the niggers feel cold
          And the slum’s got so much soul
          It’s time to taste what you most fear
          Right Guard will not help you here
          Brace yourself, my dear
          Brace yourself, my dear
          It’s a holiday in Cambodia
          It’s tough, kid, but it’s life
          It’s a holiday in Cambodia
          Don’t forget to pack a wife
          You’re a star-belly snitch
          You suck like a leech
          You want everyone to act like you
          Kiss ass while you bitch
          So you can get rich
          While your boss gets richer off you
          Well, you’ll work harder
          With a gun in your back
          For a bowl of rice a day
          Slave for soldiers
          Till you starve
          Then your head is skewered on a stake
          Now you can go where the people are one
          Now you can go where they get things done
          What you need, my son…
          What you need, my son…
          Is a holiday in Cambodia
          Where people are dressed in black
          A holiday in Cambodia
          Where you’ll kiss ass or crack
          Pol Pot, Pol Pot, Pol Pot, Pol Pot
          It’s a holiday in Cambodia
          Where you’ll do what you’re told
          It’s a holiday in Cambodia
          Where the slums got so much soul
          Pol Pot

          1. It’s OK for Libertarians to say bad things about Pol Pot. We do it every day. Apartheid South Africa is a whole different thing, which we’ve supported.

            1. Communists supported far worse regimes than South Africa. And the first prominent academic in the US to come out hard against apartheid was WH Hutt, a libertarian economist.

              1. Communists hated apartheid South Africa: it wasn’t pure agrarian slavery.

              2. “Communists supported far worse regimes than South Africa.”

                So have capitalists. IE Democratic Kampuchea. When Hun Sen and his revisionist friends attacked the KR, Reagan was not happy.

                1. Capitalists are dispicable for supporting communists.

                  And that doesn’t say anything about communism, really.

                  1. “And that doesn’t say anything about communism, really.”

                    Sorry to disappoint you. I will be more careful to say things about communism in the future.

                    1. Don’t worry about it: not talking to you, really.

    2. It was a big issue with American young people, most of whom found themselves on the opposite side of their government, supporting the terrorists and the communists.

      as a reminder that pretty much everything out of your mouth is completely wrong:

      no, “most” young people were not supporters of communists and terrorists in the 1980s. Even when they were NYC punks.

      And I was a teenager who occasionally hung out at ABC no rio in the 1980s. NYHC types were hardly a monolithic bloc of lefties. Everyone would make fun of reagan, but it wasn’t ideological: it was because he was an actor who used to make movies with monkeys and had a haircut like Bob’s Big Boy.

      1. WASHINGTON, Oct. 15? In the late 1960’s, the rallying cry for many young Americans was, ”Don’t trust anyone over 30.” In 1984, by contrast, the youth culture appears to put its trust in a President who is over 70.

        Ronald Reagan, at the age of 73 the oldest President, is more popular with young voters than with any other age group, according to a number of polls. Many disagree with some of his policies, but he is coming across to young people as a firm yet kindly grandfather figure, a leader who inspires confidence in an uncertain world.

        61-to-30 Over Mondale

        According to combined figures from the two most recent New York Times/ CBS News Polls, taken before the Presidential debate on Oct. 7, voters from the ages of 18 to 24 supported Mr. Reagan by 61 percent to 30 percent over his Democratic challenger, Walter F. Mondale.

        1. The 20-24 year olds would have attained working age in the depths of the Carter administration, so not surprising that they would appreciate Reagan four years in.

        2. “61-to-30 Over Mondale”

          So trueman was caught bullshitting AGAIN?!
          That can only be the, uh ‘many-ith’ time.
          Want a laugh? Ask him for a cite for one of his bullshit claims.

          1. “Ask him for a cite for one of his bullshit claims.”

            But it’s true, I tell you. A NYT opinion poll is backing me to the hilt, even.

            1. Ask him for a cite for his bullshit claims and you get more bullshit.
              With trueman, it’s bullshit all the way down:

              mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
              “Spouting nonsense is an end in itself.”

              1. “With trueman, it’s bullshit all the way down:”

                You’re a narrow minded bore. It’s all you deserve.

                1. Yep “mtrueman” Sevo is absolutely correct, everyone of your “posts” is chock full of bull shit. Your the one thats the fucking bore around here, whats wrong Tony? Had to create another troll account? Your still dumber than a rock, leftard.

        3. “according to a number of polls.”

          Opinion polls? Come on, you must know you can get pretty much any result you want out of them, depending on what questions are asked, their order, who is doing the asking and who is doing the answering. Etc.

          1. Gee, trueman trying to misdirect attention from his bullshit? Why, who could imagine he’d pull that shit again?
            Oh, everybody.

            1. You want to claim that most American youngsters supported apartheid, fine. I think we all appreciate the efforts of South African whites to keep their niggers in their place.

              1. Fuck off, imbecile.

                1. Internet tough guy. And bore.

              2. When did Reagan support apartheid?

                Why do I ask. You probably think he was abducted by aliens.

                1. “When did Reagan support apartheid?”

                  After someone drew him a picture.

          2. So instead you just make things up out sometime of thin air? Why do you bother commenting?

            1. “Why do you bother commenting?”

              Just read the comments. Leave the philosophical hand wringing to me.

      2. Miret even mentions that in his book. He says something like “I hated Reagan but didn’t know why. I didn’t read the papers or follow politics.”

          1. I thought it was relevant to punks not liking Reagan. Sorry if it seemed out of context.

            Carry on…..

      3. “no, “most” young people were not supporters of communists and terrorists in the 1980s. ”

        Never claimed they were. My bet is that Tim Yonahan, the star of this article, was. I’ll go out on a limb and bet that he also opposed the South African apartheid regime.

        1. “”Never claimed they were””


          It was a big issue with American young people, most of whom found themselves on the opposite side of their government, supporting the terrorists and the communists.

          everything you say is horseshit and always has been

          1. Excellent response. I’d like to see more opinion polling data from the NYT if possible.

            1. I’d like to see you ever say something while providing evidence for your claim, instead of simply being rebutted, then handwaving like this

              1. “I’d like to see you ever say something ”

                Keep reading. That’s all I’ve ever asked of anyone here.

                I’ve already conceded your point, that most young people of America supported the apartheid regime of South Africa. We Libertarians can look back in pride.

              2. Internal coherence is a tool of neocolonial oppressors, I guess.

                At least Tony can go 4 or 5 comments without flatly contradicting himself, this idiot can’t even make 2.

                1. “Internal coherence is a tool of neocolonial oppressors, I guess.”

                  Read my comment. There is nothing surprising about a music critic criticizing a musician, even if it happened over 30 years ago. Whether most Americans supported apartheid or the terrorists.

    3. Apartheid was evil. The South African Communist Party was right on the question of segregation and racial identitarianism, but were probably the most pro-Moscow communist party in the world at a time when even the majority of communists believed that the revolution had been somehow perverted by Stalinism.

      It’s OK to agree with the South African communists on apartheid, as long as you have an argument with them over Czechoslovakia afterwards. That was my problem with both Reagan and the communists.

      1. “That was my problem with both Reagan and the communists”

        What did Regan have to do with your statement?

        1. I was replying to trueman’s statement, “in 1984 things were heating up in South Africa and Reagan supported the white regime.”

          The idea that opposition to the activities of one of the superpowers necessitated uncritical support of the other or their proxies was and remains erroneous.

          For example, given the options, I think the United States increasing its influence at the expense of the Soviet Union was a good thing. However, I wouldn’t be caught defending Pinochet as those on the left consistently found themselves defending Castro.

    4. Reagan supported apartheid like Barack Obama supported communism for wanting to lift sanctions on Cuba.

      That is, neither did.

      You slurped up the propaganda the Democratic party fed freely through the media in the 1980s. Reagan didn’t like the sanctions and didn’t like the bill because he thought it would harm the black people. If that sounds familiar, it’s exactly the same narrative the Democratic party has held for, I dunno, at least 20 years– but over Cuban sanctions. So if you can tell me how sanctions on Cuba hurt the Cuban people, but sanctions on South Africa didn’t hurt any of the black people, I’m interested.

  13. Move over reason

    Better Homes and Gardens is set to be the new flagship cosmotarian magazine.

  14. How many punks does it take to change a light bulb?

    three

    One to do it, and two to claim they were changing light bulbs first.

    1. “We were hipsters before it was cool”

      1. You guys remember Lester Bangs interviewing the Ramones in Creem before the 1980 election, and Johnny freaking out the hippies by endorsing Reagan? What, you weren’t born yet? If I had been a punk, I’d be saying “I was a punk before you were a punk.” The Tubes

        As it was, I was a New Wavy, skinny-tie wearing, suburban poseur, in educational exile 1,000 miles from the Bowery. No CBGB or Max’s for me. I you liked post-hippie rock n’ roll out in the Midwest, you read the damned magazines. The store I worked in sold the British music tabloids. You could fake hipness astoundingly well after perusing Melody Maker, Sounds and the NME! Every smaller city between the Big Apple and Hollywood had its club where punk/new wave acts could play, and a `zine promoting the gigs, reviewing records and, if you were really lucky, a college radio station that would play the tunes, and a record store that sold them. MR&R may not have meant anything, but Punk did, and New York Rocker.

  15. This is pretty much why, despite being a huge music nerd and rock devotee, I never really loved many punk bands except for The Ramones, The Buzzcocks, The Misfits, The Damned etc. bands that rock, without leaning hard on some shallow lefty social agenda. As a genre, punk leans waaay to heavily on politics anyway.

    At the risk of being a hypocrite, for anybody into thrash, there’s a great libertarian-leaning band active right now called Havok, based out of Denver.

    https://youtu.be/0OGTvIeiYjg

    https://youtu.be/2GT9m0jX9vw

    1. My buddies and I stood at attention for DEVO’s Corporate Anthem, but we liked capitalism, so, was that ironic, or not?

  16. The left loves people in poverty. You can tell, since they try to make sure there are more of them all the time:

    “Brilliant Baby accounts seek to set low-income Oakland families on path to college”
    […]
    “City leaders want to shift that mind-set, offering the prospect of a better future for Oakland youth by opening a $500 college savings account for every baby born into poverty.”
    http://www.sfchronicle.com/edu…..366766.php

    1. Fucking incentives, how do they work?
      And I don’t wanna talk to an economist
      Y’all motherfuckers lying, and getting me pissed

    2. $500 invested at current savings account rates for 18 years would almost pay for a semester worth of textbooks.

      1. $500 used to buy dope a week or so after it is ‘unfrozen’ should get you some good stuff.
        Kids? She can have another one…

  17. Nothing is so amusing quite like the rigid orthodoxy of people collectively-desperate to advertise their ‘non-conformity’

  18. Stopped clocks, blind squirrels, etc:

    “Republican tax bills blow whistle on sports deductions”
    […]
    “The Republican tax-overhaul plans put a hit on sports.
    The House and Senate proposals would eliminate some breaks that benefit college and professional sports, an apparent nod to critics who say these are big businesses that don’t need or deserve taxpayer support.”
    http://www.sfchronicle.com/bus…..367253.php

    1. The bill passed by the House Thursday would prevent cities from issuing tax-exempt municipal bonds to finance the construction or renovation of professional sports stadiums.

      I’d like to know how “professional sports stadiums” is defined in the legisl’n. Because AFAIK, usually in formal terms it’s just a municipal stadium that the municipality may lease to a pro club. That’s how Yankee Stadium is, for instance. I don’t see how a law could be drafted to exclude that possibility, unless it just excludes any stadium big enough for pro sports, or revokes the tax exemption of the bonds if the stadium so financed winds up hosting pro sports.

      1. Title III, Subtitle G, Section 3604 (Page 277)

        ”(3) P
        ROFESSIONAL
        STADIUM
        BOND
        .?The
        22
        term ‘professional stadium bond’ means any bond
        23
        issued as part of an issue any proceeds of which are
        24
        used to finance or refinance capital expenditures al-
        25
        locable to a facility (or appurtenant real property)
        1
        which, during at least 5 days during any calendar
        2
        year, is used as a stadium or arena for professional
        3
        sports exhibitions, games, or training.”.

        1. Since the 5 days won’t be known until the stadium’s actually used, does this provision of the bill make the bond interest that year non-deductible?

          1. Good point. If the bonds are for an existing pro stadium’s improvements, then the IRS would be able to ixnay the tax deductions easily. If the bond issue is “sold” to the voters or legislature as being for a pro sports team’s stadium, the IRS would probably get them there too. But yeah, if the intention to have the pro team play in the stadium is kept secret until it opens, they might get away with it. However that would be very hard to pull off.

            I would interpret the “any calendar year” not necessarily to refer to the year in which the tax deduction is being claimed, but any year, future, present, or past.

            1. So, If someone might possibly game the system by claiming the football stadium is actually a day-care center, we should gripe?
              Can I call pedantry and throw a flag?

              1. yeah, but the voters/legislature would not OK a bond issue for a day care center costing tens or hundreds of millions.

            2. I don’t see anything in there about any tax liability resting on what the stadium is intended for. So what’s the bond holder going to do when hir bond interest becomes taxable income when the municipality leases the stadium to a pro team? Sue the municipality for the difference?

              I also see some bizarre consequences or perverse incentives. A municipality builds a stadium to lure a pro club, they never move in, the bonds go up in value due to their unexpected tax-free status. Then the municipality finds pro sports events to hold there, the bonds go down in value again.

  19. Here’s the musical version-

    https://goo.gl/sTG8FP

  20. The only thing better than some kick-ass punk rock is a weekend without Weigel, Citizen Crusty, and all the rest of our leftard bitches.

  21. http://indigenous.club/?p=81

    Interesting account of what is going on in Germany. Not everyone is having such good experiences with the beloved Muslim refugees.

  22. OK, the group were not fascists. But it sounds like the writers at Maximumrockandroll weren’t the only ones who thought they were. If the group was attracting people with Nazi flags and somehow inducing people to give Nazi salutes, then something was off with the message they seemed to be giving, even if it wasn’t the one they intended. Or was it their misrepresentation in the press as Nazis that caused them to attract real Nazis?

    1. “If the group was attracting people with Nazi flags and somehow inducing people to give Nazi salutes, then something was off with the message they seemed to be giving, even if it wasn’t the one they intended.”

      Dan, I’m sure there’s some more straws to grasp, just keep looking.

    2. I went to a lot of punk shows in my misspent youth. There were always some Nazi skins at the shows.

      It wasn’t the band’s politics the drew the skins. It was the loud, aggressive music that drew these individuals who wanted to be loud and aggressive.

      The skins came to the shows so that they could behave like assholes. They didn’t give a whit about the band’s politics (which were almost invariably left wing).

    3. Just like military funerals are clearly bigoted events because they attract the Westboro Baptist Church.

  23. I love victim in pain. its a top 10 record no question. cause for alarm and liberty and justice are awesome too. but these are the lyrics for public assistance. hate left wing politics and mrr all you want but dont lie to yourself or other people. your not being persecuted by PC police when your criticized for actual bullshit you said

    You spend your life on welfare lines
    Or looking for handouts
    Why don’t you go find a job
    You birth more kids to up your checks
    So you can buy more drugs
    Cash in food stamps and get drunk

    [Chorus:]
    Uncle Sam takes half my pay
    So you can live for free
    I got a family and bills to pay
    No one hands money to me
    You can go to school for nothing
    Got that government grant
    Get money in advance
    When you’re sick from shooting up
    Medicaid pays full portion
    WHEN LITTLE MARIA GETS KNOCKED UP
    SHE GETS A FREE ABORTION

    [Chorus]

    HOW COME ITS MINORITIES WHO CRY
    THINGS ARE TOO TOUGH
    On TV with their gold chains
    Claim they don’t have enough
    I say make them clean the sewers
    Don’t take no resistance
    If they don’t like it go to hell
    And cut their public assistance

    1. Now I know what Sid Vicious rolling in his grave sounds like.

    2. A song attacking welfare state abuse.

      The Horror!

      I saw we find Peter Steele and kick his ass.

      1. I miss him 🙁

  24. Punk is shit, and it’s indicative of the awful taste of the masses. The only good thing about it is its influence towards creating newer genres, but even then only some of those derivatives were worthwhile after being combined with progressive rock.
    The 80s almost killed worthwhile music.

    1. The 80s were musically great, but “punk” is 1970s music. It’s rooted in a synthesis of roots rock,R&B,Chicago BNlues, psych, early metal and especially bubblegum pop. I shouldn’t leave out free jazz because that’s the mother of the whole Detroit antecedent.

  25. Not punk related exactly, but various genres of extreme metal, most especially black metal, have been undergoing something similar in the last couple of years.

    Metal sites like nocleansinging and metal injection (the”zines” of the twenty first century) have taken stances very firmly on the left. They’ve dog piled on Marduk, which as far as I can tell is a completely apolitical band. They also fawn on Wolves in the Throne Room (for views I’m not sure they actually hold) and the now-defunct Panopticon while trying to downplay the gigantic Burzum influence on newer American black metal. Burzum is also an apolitical band, but Varg is definitely some kind of identitarian.

      1. None dare call it tReason.

        1. Not my point, but I guess it was put on a tee.

    1. I’ve seen a few pieces on how metal has always been on the right. Even dangerously so at times. That should be obvious to most people who have ever been at a metal concert. Just because its the social conservatives who targeted metal the most doesn’t mean they leaned left, especially when those people would target them for a problematic lyric about women just as hard as the socons would over “satanism”

      I’m way behind on the current state of metal, but the disconnect between publications and the fans, who are definitely on the right, is probably part of the reason for the genre’s diminishing stature in the US in particular. Sometimes I check in on the bands I’m supposed to like according to these publications, and I end up liking none of them

      1. Nope your correct ChipToBeSquare, metal does lean more right, I know because I am a metal head. That being said I like some punk and went to a few punk shows 1990’s but I hated the leftard posing that it entailed most of the bands and fans didn’t even know what the hell they were talking about which actually turned me off from punk for a long time.

    1. SIV, your nanny is calling. Go get your bottle.

    2. Should have chosen S.O.D. they’re actually funny and good musicians.

    3. Should have chosen S.O.D. they’re actually funny and good musicians.

  26. Has any rock genre ever been more narcissistic than punk?

    1. Prog Rock. Peter Gabriel era Genesis alone is somehow more narcissistic than punk.

  27. The “political correctness” in punk started roughly 15 seconds after punk started. “Non-conformists” have always championed merely a different form of conformity. Agnostic Front got hit with it, Sham 69 got hit with it in England, the Angry Samoans (Creem magazine music critics essentially trolling via punk rock) got both barrels of it.

    It’s almost as if when people suddenly find themselves with influence and power, their first instinct is to abuse it toward their own personal ends. Who could have guessed?

    1. I still can’t get over the fact that a music critic has something critical to say about musicians.

      1. I still can’t get over the fact that you can’t read. I’ll tell ya what, why don’t you go study for your English final at the community college and if you pass and get your associates’ degree, feel free to come back and try again.

        1. You will never out “I still can’t get over the fact that …” me, you pseudonymous twerp.

      2. I’m not sure you understood. The members of the Angry Samoans were actually music critics, who decided it would be fun to start a “punk band” and use it to say the most offensive things possible. They usually directed their abuse at the people within the “punk” and indie music scene like Rodney Bingenheimer. He didn’t take it very well…

  28. Punk almost immediately became dominated by upper middle class suburban white kids, the same kids who would spur a panic when NWA became popular. Frankly punk never would have survived without legions of disaffected kids who were mad at their parents using their parents’ money to buy that new split EP from that new DIY label, and that EP doesn’t get released without a few band members’ parents helping them out to get equipment. The idea that any punk hates Green Day for selling out or making punk corporate, for example, is laughable. The kids who discovered punk because of them weren’t too different from the kids who came before. Nor are the punks who founded emo. The fact that punk has an unusually high number of people in its scene who have college or even advanced degrees is not a coincidence either. These kids were always waging a rebellion against a comfortable middle class life, not systematic oppression or some shit. “Mall punk” is and always has been a redundant term

    It’s an absolutely insufferable scene. But there are still great bands throughout its history, and if you’re honest about why it appeals to you, you don’t have to get caught up in its sanctimony

    1. For clarification: the media panicked over suburban white kids becoming NWA fans. That kinda shows how vapid punk’s rebellion always was though. If your kid was blasting NWA, that scared parents ten times more than a Reagan Youth record ever could

    2. This is probably the most honest assessment I’ve ever seen about the punk scene.

      I always say I was born too late (1981) because the music I love comes from that time period, but I honestly probably would’ve treated it the same way I treated most of the pop punk that was popular when I was a teenager, by sneering at it.

      That said, seeing Bad Brains and Sick of it All right before CBGB’s shut down is still one of my favorite concert experiences. Here’s hoping VoD makes another reunion comeback…

  29. I guess the looters were worried about having a Big Tent United Front and did not want to alienate any Bryanists, Altrurians, Nationalsocialists or other mystical fellow travelers

  30. “at a Black Flag show I was sent flying across the dance floor by none other than the late John Belushi”

    Is this the proper usage of “Late”? It sounds like someone threw Belushi’s corpse at him.

  31. ‘Jimmy Drescher’?

    Wow.

    He was called Jimmy Gestapo then. That’s what most of the fan base knew him as–and he hated the lefty, intolerant bullshit that was eating the scene. But he hated it with a sneering grin–he was a proponent of the ‘no-edge’ answer to straight edge leftist puritanism.

    But you don’t know that–because you weren’t there.

    Ken’s right about that–you HAD to be there. At the shows, at the squats, running the streets at night. You had to be there.

    But gods help you if you got on the wrong side of the leftists and communists that killed the scene.

    See, that’s who the ‘boneheads’ and ‘nazi’ skins were–not the idiots who went on TV with the KKK or the neo-nazis. The ‘boneheads’ and ‘nazi’ skins were a lot of the same kind of people who get called Nazis today by antifa and the rabid left.

    They were really republicans, or libertarians or kinda anarchistic in a right leaning way–their big sin was not towing the leftist line. They could be black, jewish, white, Hispanic–

    Roger got called ‘nazi’ and ‘right wing’ because the commies HATE the Cuban exile community.

    That has gotten so lost now.

    Worse, the people still spitting it out, the ones who’ve stopped being leftists don’t yet seem to grasp that. They still can’t get that they were attacking people who were simply disagreeing politically–people who were never actually Nazis.

  32. There was always a large right-wing component of ‘punk’ broadly defined, it could be a bit dangerous to stumble into it. I accidentally ended up at some nationalist band show once, saw some lads (I’d say “skinhead” types, sorry) beat 2-3 people bloody. Very organized ? someone would provoke someone in the crowd they didn’t like, tended to be men with longer hair?, then 4 or 5 would jump the person, kick them bloody on the ground, then melt back into the crowd. Girlfriends would sit on the guys to hide them and make it look like they had been chilling. They were on an insane high afterwards buzzing about it in the bathroom. And there were enough of them that nobody else including me fingered anyone, even when they took people out to ambulances. The show went on, a lot of chest-puffery and heavy chords. I think today you’d call it an alt-right dream party, but it was going on back then.

    It was the days of U.S. backing of literal fascism (El Mozote massacre etc.) so it was easier for me at the time to feel more at home with the Maximum Rocknroll brand of left-libertarianism. But the appeal of nationalism and right-wing politics has of course generally been dominant with self-described Libertarians. I remember arguing with the campus libertarians, they were organizing around a quarter-cent sales tax increase and I was a punk rocker talking about the UCA massacre – just totally different moral universes…

  33. I can’t say this enough, leftists are dishonest scum, never trust them. Their the most full of shit people you will ever meet, sanctimonious shit head liars who crave power and will destroy and lie about anybody and anything to gain it. If some leftist publication, small or large wants to ever interview you, say no, tell them to stuff it, because they’ll do what they always do, edit the interview and take stuff out of context on purpose to serve their agenda. Agnostic Front seems to have got the brunt of this back in the day, leftists are the biggest conformists yet they constantly pose as “non conformists” that couldn’t be further from the truth. If you deviate even one iota from their party line they whack you down. Fuck them.

  34. in the words of the late, great dr. david thorpe:

    “I refuse to believe that modern hardcore fans actually enjoy music on any level. I think they like the idea of music, but I don’t think they like music. They like guitars and concerts and bands and tight pants, but music is really just not involved in any part of the process. They’ve cut out the middleman and headed straight for the part with ringing ears and drinking and getting laid. Some of them lately have even gone so far as to cut out the parts about drinking and getting laid, too. I can’t tell whether it’s genius or madness, honestly. “

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.