Page 1 of 8
Punx&Skunx
Registered User
Join date: Feb 2008
223 IQ
#1
During my short time here, i've had a few interesting conversations dealing with bands being capitalist. One thing really stuck to me:

Quote by devourthekitten
Capitalism is an economic system, and they're making a big profit, which is money, so they can get more property, by being on a big label. And that is capitalism... I don't think a band can be sincere about hating the system and wanting to get rid of big corporations if they're on a major label and making tons of money from their "least favorite thing"...capitalism.



My question is how do you think capitalism effects bands, and what is your stance on the issue of capitalism, bands, and major record labels?

I don't think capitalism really effects the bands in such a way that Devourthekitten seems to think. Frankly i dont really see how the idea of a big corporation is the same as a major record label. The record label is the one making the money, bands get their money when they go on tours and sell merch. I think the main reason behind being on a major record label is to get ones music out there. On a major record label bands can spread their music out to a larger fan base one that a smaller record label might not be able to reach. I find it hard to believe bands a benefitting from capitalism when they are traveling the country in sh*tty van as opposed to a charter bus.

Discuss...
Last edited by Punx&Skunx at Feb 25, 2008,
mike2
Registered User
Join date: Feb 2005
967 IQ
#2
it's more or less how the record label does, than how much money a band gets. Like anti-flag signing to RCA, RCA helps with the war effort in Iraq (I forgot how...something like funding) and they are against the war. and Against Me! believe in "Anarchy" or anarchist ideals, yet they are part of a corporation...which doesn't seem to be very anarchist.
Quote by BrianApocalypse
Rancid are the best punk band ever.

Tim Armstrong is a songwriting genius, is a complete fashion diva and has an incredible singing voice.

He doesn't sound like Opie from family guy at all.
crustyreed
Registered User
Join date: Oct 2007
493 IQ
#3
Not only that if a band is on a major they are rich. Like rockstars, thus anti-flag going 'yeah we live in a ****hole', uhm no you guys don't and even if you do you have the ability to live in decent house. Alot of south side kids make fun of the older crusties (from middle class families) for doing the same thing.

BTW I know Profane existence (a truly radical) punk zine, they said 'ok with the demise of independent music stores, we have to find new ways to get these outs.'' They got an offer from Banens and Noble stock people asking if they were interested in selling to barnes and nobles. So they send some to barnes and nobles, and borders and say 'hey do you want to carry these?'' They reviewed them and said 'You need more content and pictures.'' IN return a flat out 'no'. I think if they had gotten them into major stores that would of been awesome, definitely could of gotten more people into crust/DIY, but changing the zine around to suit them and the 'market'? **** that. If you change anything to get on a major i cannot support you at all.
mike2
Registered User
Join date: Feb 2005
967 IQ
#4
^that is also true, usually they want your band to change your sound...

but even indie labels suck as much as the major labels...look at hellcat and what tim armstrong did to leftover crack.
Quote by BrianApocalypse
Rancid are the best punk band ever.

Tim Armstrong is a songwriting genius, is a complete fashion diva and has an incredible singing voice.

He doesn't sound like Opie from family guy at all.
original=punk
Banned
Join date: Jan 2007
2,482 IQ
#5
Seriously? I'm the first one to point out that this person cannot even spell "Role" properly, and I'm supposed to hear his opinion of capitalism? Hah.

Capitalism isn't bad. (zomg un-p0nx!)
Making money isn't bad. Money doesn't exist, so making it has no affect on the world as a whole.


EDIT: Also, contrary to popular belief, capitalism is NOT the reason why big corporations are "eevil" it's just humanity being stupid. Wanted to make money is something that shouldn't be "bad" But doing anything and exploiting people and their homes is bad. But that isn't capitalism. In a socialist society, the government, in theory, could still do the same thing, and it wouldn't even be for money!!
Last edited by original=punk at Feb 25, 2008,
whyvern
jet skis on the reg
Join date: Mar 2002
3,296 IQ
#6
Capitalism is bad. Money is evil. Corporations suck. Be a punk and grow some balls and let the bastard's know who really owns this world.
HELP ME I'M TRAPPED IN A HUMAN BODY!
original=punk
Banned
Join date: Jan 2007
2,482 IQ
#7
Quote by whyvern
Capitalism is bad. Money is evil. Corporations suck. Be a punk and grow some balls and let the bastard's know who really owns this world.



Quite obviously this is sarcasm? Cause if it isn't then i can't worship you anymore
sargasm
1977 and we are going mad
Join date: May 2003
1,817 IQ
#8
Capitalism polarizes society into distinct economic classes, the poorer of which will always get ****ed over. Nobody deserves the luxuries which capitalism allows to the few, or the hardships that capitalism imposes on the many. Money assigns specific values to the worth of individuals, which are arbitrary and false.
jimmyjimjim
D? is for Danger?!
Join date: Apr 2005
99 IQ
#9
^okay...but what system do you follow than? Anarchy is not feasible, communism is not feasible. But in context of this thread...
You have to stick to your morals. If you hate big labels, than don't sign. If you can make money some other way, that's good news. However, usually getting signed by a big label is the best way to maintain a livelihood through music. You may have regional success, but if you don't want to work a day job than you have to stick with a big label. It's a personal choice; do you consider Bob Dylan and John Lennon false idols?
Also, corporations create and donate to charities and foundations, which more positively affect the world than punk bands singing about the ills of capitalism.
original=punk
Banned
Join date: Jan 2007
2,482 IQ
#10
Quote by jimmyjimjim
^okay...but what system do you follow than? Anarchy is not feasible, communism is not feasible. But in context of this thread...
You have to stick to your morals. If you hate big labels, than don't sign. If you can make money some other way, that's good news. However, usually getting signed by a big label is the best way to maintain a livelihood through music. You may have regional success, but if you don't want to work a day job than you have to stick with a big label. It's a personal choice; do you consider Bob Dylan and John Lennon false idols?
Also, corporations create and donate to charities and foundations, which more positively affect the world than punk bands singing about the ills of capitalism.



That's a defeatist's attitude. That's why we anarchists don't give up, we don't believe in it being impossible. you gotta believe. Besides, if worse comes to worse, the anarchists can just take over an area of the stastes, declare it independant and start over form there.
jimmyjimjim
D? is for Danger?!
Join date: Apr 2005
99 IQ
#11
It's not defeatist, it's realist. Do you have a job? Do you go to school? If you do, you're not a true anarchist. If you really wanted to overthrow a government you would spend every moment of the day planning and carrying out subversive activities. But you don't; you probably will say "but I need a job for money so I can finance myself" or "I need an education to further my goals." You'd be right, but you wouldn't be a true anarchist. And no, anarchists couldn't take over an area of the states, because what would they form, a government? Plus, what situation will result in "if worse comes to worse?" I'm sorry, but anarchists had their heyday back in the Early 1900's. Find a more constructive way to shape the world about you; don't just try to overthrow something because you perceive inequality. It's true that it exists, but anarchy will not solve it.
axeslash
I got no learnin'
Join date: Jan 2006
3,485 IQ
#12
I'm glad O=P pointed out his massive spelling error, I was afraid no one else noticed, which would have made me very disappointed.

Anyways, Capitalism is a system in which those with money have the power, and those without money have no power. There's that whole class division thing everyone talks about, and then there's all that stuff about corporation. Whoop-de-doo.

Major labels are bad because they change the sound, and they expect the bands to do what they want, because it's a ****ing business. I would be shocked if labels didn't try to get bands to be more profitable. The question is, what are you willing to give up to reach that amount of money? And are you willing to risk all of your actual fans to get some money off of some teeny-boppers buying records off their parents money? It's all about whether or not you think it's worth it.
Journalism is just a gun. It's only got one bullet in it, but if you aim right, that's all you need. Aim it right, and you can blow a kneecap off the world.
original=punk
Banned
Join date: Jan 2007
2,482 IQ
#13
Really, what do you know of my beliefs? I don't believe in a set hierarchy, does that mean I disobey every request a teacher gives me? No, because I hold respect for them. I don't plan to overthrow the government, that was a joke., learn to laugh.

I like to learn. My teachers like teaching. Someone pays them to teach, creating even further incentive to teach me. I pay them money for my education, becuase I wish to not grow up an ignorant buffon, like, I don't know, you. Anarchy isn't about overthrowing the government, it's not about molotov cocktails, it's not about christians in the 1900s. It's about people, who want to be free, so they live their lives as freethinkers and doers. They do as they wish. I live at home, because I want to, I love my mom, she will take care of me until I graduate, in which I will take over my life for myself.

Who says I will take a normal job? Who says I won't? Who are you to say I will buy a house. Who am I to say I won't possibly own an apartment? You don't know me, or what I'm about. Leave it that way, cause you'll never understand.
sargasm
1977 and we are going mad
Join date: May 2003
1,817 IQ
#14
Quote by jimmyjimjim
^okay...but what system do you follow than? Anarchy is not feasible, communism is not feasible. But in context of this thread...
You have to stick to your morals. If you hate big labels, than don't sign. If you can make money some other way, that's good news. However, usually getting signed by a big label is the best way to maintain a livelihood through music. You may have regional success, but if you don't want to work a day job than you have to stick with a big label. It's a personal choice; do you consider Bob Dylan and John Lennon false idols?
Also, corporations create and donate to charities and foundations, which more positively affect the world than punk bands singing about the ills of capitalism.


I am an anarchist. I realize my ideals by applying them to my own life, and my own small communities. I try to live as much as possible without depending on the government and the arbitrary classist economy that endeavors to enslave us all. A complete social revolution would be nice, but I'm not holding my breath.

"Punk bands singing about capialism" is a pretty narrow minded view of what punk actually accomplishes. Spend some time in the punk scene. Go to Food Not Bombs. There are a lot of positive things happening within the community. It isn't all about the music. It's about building community in our own way without relying on anyone else to do it for us. It might seem like a small thing, but it's growing every day.

Corporations are able to give a little bit back because they have so much. Very few of them are doing anywhere near what they could be, and they never will because they don't have to. If it doesn't turn them a profit they're not interested. They'll only do enough so they can say "hey we help people" and apathetic middle class folk can buy their products under the impression that they're making a difference.
sargasm
1977 and we are going mad
Join date: May 2003
1,817 IQ
#15
ITT: People don't understand anarchism.
axeslash
I got no learnin'
Join date: Jan 2006
3,485 IQ
#16
Quote by jimmyjimjim
It's not defeatist, it's realist. Do you have a job? Do you go to school? If you do, you're not a true anarchist. If you really wanted to overthrow a government you would spend every moment of the day planning and carrying out subversive activities. But you don't; you probably will say "but I need a job for money so I can finance myself" or "I need an education to further my goals." You'd be right, but you wouldn't be a true anarchist. And no, anarchists couldn't take over an area of the states, because what would they form, a government? Plus, what situation will result in "if worse comes to worse?" I'm sorry, but anarchists had their heyday back in the Early 1900's. Find a more constructive way to shape the world about you; don't just try to overthrow something because you perceive inequality. It's true that it exists, but anarchy will not solve it.

You do not know anarchy, but you wish to tell someone else that they don't know about it? I find that to be very hypocritical, and I for one will not stand for such tomfoolery.
Journalism is just a gun. It's only got one bullet in it, but if you aim right, that's all you need. Aim it right, and you can blow a kneecap off the world.
jimmyjimjim
D? is for Danger?!
Join date: Apr 2005
99 IQ
#17
Quote by original=punk
Really, what do you know of my beliefs? I don't believe in a set hierarchy, does that mean I disobey every request a teacher gives me? No, because I hold respect for them. I don't plan to overthrow the government, that was a joke., learn to laugh.

I like to learn. My teachers like teaching. Someone pays them to teach, creating even further incentive to teach me. I pay them money for my education, becuase I wish to not grow up an ignorant buffon, like, I don't know, you. Anarchy isn't about overthrowing the government, it's not about molotov cocktails, it's not about christians in the 1900s. It's about people, who want to be free, so they live their lives as freethinkers and doers. They do as they wish. I live at home, because I want to, I love my mom, she will take care of me until I graduate, in which I will take over my life for myself.

Who says I will take a normal job? Who says I won't? Who are you to say I will buy a house. Who am I to say I won't possibly own an apartment? You don't know me, or what I'm about. Leave it that way, cause you'll never understand.


Bolded letters=lame joke, and an ignorant statement. You do not know me. You paint me as ignorant, and you probably assume I blindly follow the state. In short, you feel I am a tool. It would be unwise of you to view me as such. I share more of your views than you believe. Yet, we differ in several key areas.
You seem to be an individualist anarchist. You practice your anarchy through freethinking and doing; I too think as I want, and do as I want. I am not anarchist, and I feel that is weak anarchy. Yet, you seem to feel all anarchists are like this. Anarchy is about having no government, following as little government as you can, and establishing an alternative society. You may disagree with this; it's your right. There are too many sets of views of anarchy to create one base theme; indeed, having one set of views would not be anarchist in principle at all.
I do appreciate the later humor in the house/apartment joke. Perhaps you should consider a teepee and a nomadic lifestyle. Native American (First Nation) living does fascinate me greatly, and maybe we could start a tribe. Bows and arrows and everything.

To Sargasm: earlier I made the comment about punk bands singing about capitalism to emphasize my point that corporations do more good than many people credit them. Of course they shortchange people, but some do operate in good faith. Right now I guess I am the devil's advocate; the Food not Bombs organization is great, yet it probably does less than corporations doing and funding the same things. In the long run that is unlikely to change; I would like to have people like you running corporations and creating change through them, yet you probably have no interest in doing that such thing. You may call me a Booker T. and a sellout, but I feel the best opportunity for change lies in reforming the institution through the inside. I hope someday that I may do that, and I wish you great success in your initiatives. Perhaps one day our paths shall cross on the common path to victory.

EDIT: Yes, that last post is quite corny and dumb. Please excuse it. Anyways, the real reason for this edit is that I feel have gotten off on the wrong foot here. I am not hostile to your ideas; I am sorry if I have come off as that. In fact, you deserve more respect than nearly everyone I know. What I really trying to say is, why can't we be friends?
Last edited by jimmyjimjim at Feb 25, 2008,
whyvern
jet skis on the reg
Join date: Mar 2002
3,296 IQ
#18
Corporations do nothing great. They've seen this world as a way to benefit themselves with no regards for it's other inhabitants. Anarchism and capitalism cannot coexist. There's nothing moral even in the classical sense of the world of an ideology or a system that takes advantage of people's weaknesses and dehumanizes people.

You may say that technology has done wonders for the world and that it wouldn't be possible without corporations.

You're wrong.

Technology has done wonders for HUMANS and the world has suffered every step of the way. Do I reap the benefits of capitalism? Sometimes, I do. I'm not ashamed to say that I have used this exploitative system but I also take steps in my life to fight it and everyone tries their own little bit to limit their influence on our lives.

I firmly stand by what I said before. Under no circumstance is a capitalist system benefital to this world. You shouldn't worship people any way. No Gods. No Masters.

Up the punx.
HELP ME I'M TRAPPED IN A HUMAN BODY!
original=punk
Banned
Join date: Jan 2007
2,482 IQ
#19
I believe that scientific development has aided us in the ways of medicine, and that's it. But the corporations didn't do it. The people did it.


I am an individualistic person, why? Because I am an individual. Although i may do what I want, and that only, that does not mean I am selfish. What if I want to help people? Then I help people, because I want to. That's why i'm being taught to be al ifeguard, because I want to make things safe for people. I also am using it to learn leadership skils, in which I am lacking horribly. I pay only 10% of the actual fee, for undisclosed reasons, and so therefore you cannot blame me for "helping the government I wish to "bring down" I think many people need a leader, but others do not, so why should the leader who a group of people want, be leader for all people? Why do we close off into "borders" of countries? Wouldn't it be easier weith no borders? You would have to deal with citizenship problems.

Countires happened because cultures became gradually segregated. But we're at an age where we are intelligent enough to realize the fact now that in essence, we are all the same, so we shouldn't create countires to sheild our cultures, in fact, just let the cultures intermingle across the globe, a mini Ireland could pop up in what is known as India. Wouldn't that be beautiful? I think it would be.

No borders, No bosses, No Masters, No Idols.
sargasm
1977 and we are going mad
Join date: May 2003
1,817 IQ
#20
I think technology and anarchism are not mutually exclusive. I think I might write an essay or even a book one day about reconciling my anarchism with my love of technology.
jpate770
Registered User
Join date: Dec 2007
168 IQ
#21
Quote by sargasm
I think technology and anarchism are not mutually exclusive. I think I might write an essay or even a book one day about reconciling my anarchism with my love of technology.

I agree. The form of anarchy denying advances in technology is actually anarcho-primitism, so, outside of that belief, it is perfectly plausible for the two to coexist.
Ska Wars
Call Marcus!
Join date: Sep 2006
1,118 IQ
#22
you're with us or you're with the terrorests!
And clenching your fist for the ones like us
Who are oppressed by the figures of beauty,
You fixed yourself, you said, "Well, never mind,
We are ugly, but we have the music."
crustyreed
Registered User
Join date: Oct 2007
493 IQ
#24
Jimmyjimjim funny thing is their are 'anarchists' as you describe them. They squat, find their food in garbage cans, dont work, hardly consume anything. Indeed modeled after native american culture. And to say that doing anything less than that is basically saying the lovely quote 'if your not with us, your against us' Generalizations dont work.

This corporate going green stuff is bull****. Its 100% market demand. Nothing more. When a corporation puts up 20 million or so for 'Public Image' its just a image, they dont give a ****
But lets keep that demand rolling!
NO COMPROMISE IN DEFENSE OF OUR MOTHER EARTH
NO COAL, NO OIL, NO SHOWERS, NO CARS
Ska Wars
Call Marcus!
Join date: Sep 2006
1,118 IQ
#25
Quote by Iluvpowerchords
Capitalism?

More liek CRAPitalism!

lol am i rite or wut?

sig'd for truthfulness

EDIT: Ok, so I have no idea how to change my signature now that UG's changed...help me?
And clenching your fist for the ones like us
Who are oppressed by the figures of beauty,
You fixed yourself, you said, "Well, never mind,
We are ugly, but we have the music."
Last edited by Ska Wars at Feb 25, 2008,
jimmyjimjim
D? is for Danger?!
Join date: Apr 2005
99 IQ
#26
You missed my point. I'm aware that there are people living like that, both out of choice and out of neccessity. You don't have to be an anarchist to be against the government, so I don't see why everyone wants to classify themselves as anarchist, as true anarchy is existence without government. There may be a romantic appeal that lies with classifying one's self as anarchist, and that has led to a vast diversification in what is called "anarchy."
Also, be careful when you and anyone else rails against corporations. Most of the corporations are small business entities that provide useful services for their communities and employ members of the communities, and have no wish nor means to conspire against the greater populace. I believe you refer to the mega corporations, which yield too much power and control in our present world. A distinction must be made, for the destruction of small corporations only hurts our world.
jimmyjimjim
D? is for Danger?!
Join date: Apr 2005
99 IQ
#27
to ska wars:
Go to Control Panel
Edit Signature is first option, if that's any help
Ska Wars
Call Marcus!
Join date: Sep 2006
1,118 IQ
#28
Oh, I'm stupid. I was looking in the My Profile thing. Thanks.
And clenching your fist for the ones like us
Who are oppressed by the figures of beauty,
You fixed yourself, you said, "Well, never mind,
We are ugly, but we have the music."
sargasm
1977 and we are going mad
Join date: May 2003
1,817 IQ
#30
Anarchism isn't as black and white as a lot of people seem to think. It is, by definition, lack of government. A society without a government could be many different things though.
whyvern
jet skis on the reg
Join date: Mar 2002
3,296 IQ
#31
Quote by jimmyjimjim
You missed my point. I'm aware that there are people living like that, both out of choice and out of neccessity. You don't have to be an anarchist to be against the government, so I don't see why everyone wants to classify themselves as anarchist, as true anarchy is existence without government. There may be a romantic appeal that lies with classifying one's self as anarchist, and that has led to a vast diversification in what is called "anarchy."
Also, be careful when you and anyone else rails against corporations. Most of the corporations are small business entities that provide useful services for their communities and employ members of the communities, and have no wish nor means to conspire against the greater populace. I believe you refer to the mega corporations, which yield too much power and control in our present world. A distinction must be made, for the destruction of small corporations only hurts our world.


No, When I said corporation I meant corporation. It's a legal entity that has the same rights as me. The very design of incorporating something is unnatural and inhumane. To say that someone's business interests have the same value as a child's health and human rights is beyond ****ed up.

True anarchy means you exist without hierarchies not just governments. So racism, sexism and capitalism all are forms of oppressive hierarchies. As anarchists we try and remove those from our lives as much as possible.

Let me stress again the while corporations may help PEOPLE, there is more to the community at large than people. Corporations have done nothing but harm our planet and the rest of it's inhabitants for profit. Even if they are a "green" corporation, they're making money, as someone said earlier, off the market demand that they present a caring image. However, if they truly cared for the environment , they'd stop producing.
HELP ME I'M TRAPPED IN A HUMAN BODY!
original=punk
Banned
Join date: Jan 2007
2,482 IQ
#32
Quote by whyvern
No, When I said corporation I meant corporation. It's a legal entity that has the same rights as me. The very design of incorporating something is unnatural and inhumane. To say that someone's business interests have the same value as a child's health and human rights is beyond ****ed up.

True anarchy means you exist without hierarchies not just governments. So racism, sexism and capitalism all are forms of oppressive hierarchies. As anarchists we try and remove those from our lives as much as possible.

Let me stress again the while corporations may help PEOPLE, there is more to the community at large than people. Corporations have done nothing but harm our planet and the rest of it's inhabitants for profit. Even if they are a "green" corporation, they're making money, as someone said earlier, off the market demand that they present a caring image. However, if they truly cared for the environment , they'd stop producing.



QFT
sargasm
1977 and we are going mad
Join date: May 2003
1,817 IQ
#33
This thread makes me happy.
lavazza
K**e sold out
Join date: Dec 2005
7,304 IQ
#34
No it´s a ****......I want to follow, but I don´t want to read all of your long posts

Whatever......Whenever msuicians start to sell CDs in huge masses and sign major labels or do anything similar their music becomes worse, popular examples are Anti Flag, Against Me!
Iluvpowerchords
Flau-BEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR
Join date: Jan 2005
1,364 IQ
#35
The Replacements managed to improve when they signed to Sire.

Or at least they released two fabulous albums:

Tim and Pleased to Meet Me.

Of course none of them were quite as good as "Let It Be" but they still managed to not suck.

Same thing with Jawbreaker

Dear You doesn't suck.

Plenty of bands don't suck after going major.
Adam_Harrison9
Built To Last
Join date: Apr 2006
2,428 IQ
#36
Quote by crustyreed
Not only that if a band is on a major they are rich. Like rockstars, thus anti-flag going 'yeah we live in a ****hole', uhm no you guys don't and even if you do you have the ability to live in decent house. Alot of south side kids make fun of the older crusties (from middle class families) for doing the same thing.
BTW I know Profane existence (a truly radical) punk zine, they said 'ok with the demise of independent music stores, we have to find new ways to get these outs.'' They got an offer from Banens and Noble stock people asking if they were interested in selling to barnes and nobles. So they send some to barnes and nobles, and borders and say 'hey do you want to carry these?'' They reviewed them and said 'You need more content and pictures.'' IN return a flat out 'no'. I think if they had gotten them into major stores that would of been awesome, definitely could of gotten more people into crust/DIY, but changing the zine around to suit them and the 'market'? **** that. If you change anything to get on a major i cannot support you at all.


LAWL LAWL LAWL LAWL
BrianApocalypse
Prozac Junkie
Join date: May 2004
7,782 IQ
#37
This is a good thread. I won't post an opinion, because I don't feel that I'm able to formulate one. But yes, it's nice to see something heavyweight.
mike2
Registered User
Join date: Feb 2005
967 IQ
#38
Quote by Adam_Harrison9
LAWL LAWL LAWL LAWL


how come you can not realise the hypocricy of anti-flag? just because the truth is that they are sellouts and definently not a punk band anymore, doesn't mean that you can't enjoy them.
Quote by BrianApocalypse
Rancid are the best punk band ever.

Tim Armstrong is a songwriting genius, is a complete fashion diva and has an incredible singing voice.

He doesn't sound like Opie from family guy at all.
IlikeTheSKA
Respect my conglomerate
Join date: Apr 2004
300 IQ
#39
Quote by mike2
how come you can not realise the hypocricy of anti-flag? just because the truth is that they are sellouts and definently not a punk band anymore, doesn't mean that you can't enjoy them.


They say they still have total control over their music, and that they're using the major label to spread their message further.

I say

Baby,
I'm
a
Capitalist.
My style is impetuous.
My defense is impregnable, and I'm just ferocious.
I want your heart.
I want to eat your children.

-Mike Tyson
Adam_Harrison9
Built To Last
Join date: Apr 2006
2,428 IQ
#40
Quote by mike2
how come you can not realise the hypocricy of anti-flag? just because the truth is that they are sellouts and definently not a punk band anymore, doesn't mean that you can't enjoy them.


I acknowledge that, but unlike most I acknowledge the causes they support, whether they're on a major label or not, they do more than your average punk bands. The benefits of their major label signing, outweigh the negatives massively. Sure they've been hypocritical, but that's something they have to deal with, I enjoy the music, sure. But to say they're rich is absurd.