Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: Ernest
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 03:26 PM

The working people - but not some self-appointed leaders of them.

The working people do include a lot of middle class people. Small craftsmen, farmers or merchants for instance also working.

In fact most of the population is working. And about half of them is voting liberal /left while about the other half is voting conservative.

So I am wit Jerry in this issue.

Admittedly Spleen Cringe has a point too. Being conservative I don`t have any problems sharing a song or tune with someone tending to the left but this won`t change my mind on political issues - unless they have very good arguments.

Regards
Ernest

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: Azizi
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 03:22 PM

So Jerry, are you saying that you don't agree with the efforts in Great Britain to stop fascists from expropriating British folk music? And are you saying that you would attend concerts that included singers/musicians who supported Nazi organizations and you would befriend or continue to be friends with people who hold fascist beliefs?

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 03:16 PM

Republicans work.

Jerry

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 03:08 PM

Party politics aside, if the accepted and widely documented definition is right doesn't that make folk music the historic voice of the working people. The subject matter and social setting of most of the songs, and the social background of most of the carriers of these songs would suggest so.
"Bascom Lamar Lunsford"
Is my memory playing tricks or wasn't it Lunsford who had a Guthrie concert cancelled because he was a 'Commie'?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 03:03 PM

Interesting discussion. If I'm going to hear a folk concert I don't check to see whether the musician is a Democrat or a Republican, or what their stance is on gay marriage. It's not that those issues aren't important. I'm just not likely to let political affiliation determine whether or not I enjoy a folk musician. I'm not even all that interested in knowing what it is. I will admit that if Rush Limbaugh did a concert I wouldn't go...

Jerry

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasi
From: Spleen Cringe
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 03:03 PM

Hmmm... I think M Ted has got a point. I don't for a minute think that everyone who doesn't like rap or r&b is a racist, but nonetheless there's an awful lot of coded messages out there...

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: Maryrrf
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 02:49 PM

MTed - So as far as you're concerned, people who don't care for Rap or Hip Hop, or for the pop music of Jennifer Lopez and Shakira - are racist? I think you're way off base there. That's an absurd assumption.

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: Azizi
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 02:28 PM

The object of my whole post was that I think it's immaterial whether or not a folk musician is Republican or Democrat, wealthy or poor. They're all folks, sure enough.
-Jerry Rasmussen

I strongly second what Spleen Cringe wrote and I wonder Jerry, if you are saying that a folk singer's political views never matter-especially in light of the Folk Against Fascism threads such as the one that I've hyperlinked.

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasi
From: Spleen Cringe
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 02:13 PM

With all due respect to Jerry, what a pile of sentimentalised old poppycock! Yes, I'll happily sit down and play a few folk songs with a conservative if they share my musical tastes. But when it comes to the truly important issues in life - like when they want to decimated my health service or cut the funding to educate my kids or spend my taxes on building up an even bigger stockpile of guns and bombs or ostracise and exclude my gay friends- I'll fight the buggers tooth and nail all the way.

Some things are more important that friggin' folk music

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: Amos
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 02:09 PM

In Peekskill, in 1949, a stone the size of a softball was hurled through the window of Pete Seeger's car as he drove to a concert, nearly hitting his baby son. There was a riot around the concert grounds, with angry "conservatives" wielding fenceposts and throwing stones at "the communists". (Paul Robeson was the primary target of the attack, but he didn't go to the concert, having been tipped off).

Pete has the softball-sized stone cemented into his fireplace chimney to remind him of the intersection between folk music and conservative politics, according to "How Can I Keep from Singing" By David King Dunaway. A fascinating read, the book can be found here in Google Books; the concert story is on page 13.

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 02:00 PM

Sheesh, Dave: Read my post:

"I bet Bascom Lamar Lunsford was a Republican. He was a lawyer, for God's sake! The only work he ever did with his hands was sticking them in someone else's pockets. Sounds stupid, don't it. And it is.
But no more foolish than the endless quest to divide people into warring factions."

I said it was stupid because it's the kind of stupid stuff you hear people say. I have the greatest admiration for Lunsford. I have no idea whether he was Republican or Democrat. I could care less. Or is it I couldn't care less? I could never get that one right. The object of my whole post was that I think it's immaterial whether or not a folk musician is Republican or Democrat, wealthy or poor. They're all folks, sure enough.

Jerry

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasi
From: M.Ted
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 01:55 PM

I might have called this thread "Music is NOT the Universal Language", because of the often extreme reaction people often have to styles of music that are foreign to them--

Music has always been one of principle activities that people share, and is a way that people identify themselves as a group. That makes it easy for people outside the group to identify them, too, and so musical genres can be easily identified with the racial/ethnic stereotypes--

It isn't socially acceptable for people to say, "I don't like African-Americans" anymore, but no one bats an eye if you say, "I hate Rap and Hip-Hop." And of course, when a song by Jennifer Lopez or Shakira comes on, and someone says, "They play way to much of that..."
it is a socially acceptable way of saying "There are too many of "them" in this country."

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasi
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 01:34 PM

I bet Bascom Lamar Lunsford was a Republican.

Actually, it seems to me he was a Democrat. A Southern Democrat, mark you. Which is not all that far from Republican, on some issues.

He was a lawyer, for God's sake! The only work he ever did with his hands was sticking them in someone else's pockets.

That's an invidious misapprehension, and I think you should be abashed to say it. Despite fashionable and cynical popular beliefs, lawyers are all over the lot, Some fall in the lawyer-shark category you seem to be referring to, and some are purely technicians who do office-type things like write wills and contracts, and some are save-the-world types who devote their lives to low-paid jobs for charities and community organizations, just to illustrate the range.

And as to Bascom Lamar Lunsford, he put in what must have been thousands and thousands of unpaid hours toward the organization and running of the famous folk music organization he started (whose name escapes me just at the moment).

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 01:27 PM

Still, I'd say that political conservatives probably feel more comfortable in old-time music circles, where music is chiefly non-political. Among those that call themselves folk musicians in the US and the UK, there is enough music that is political and distinctly liberal in nature, that I think a conservative would feel uncomfortable in their midst. In the 1960s, American folk music was much more uniformly liberal in its political outlook. Now there seems to be room for non-political music.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: Amos
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 01:22 PM

Perhaps; but our folk music here in the U.S. has been political, topical, AND sentimental ever since the first lyrics to "Yankee Doodle" were penned. The themes that are sounding in the back of my mind just now are "We Shall Overcome", "This Land Is Your Land", "Oh. Freedom!", "The Universal Soldier", "Lay Down My Sword and Shield", and many others. All of these reflect the core concern of plain people addressing their nature as groups and communities, and the politics is a natural extensionn of that.

As for the UK's folk music being non-political in nature, I think it could be argued that "Lili Bulera", "Kevin Barry", and "The Campbells Are Coming", to name just a few quick items, are very much evidence to the contrary.

It would be a sorry thing indeed to see the amorphous and dynamic term "folk music" being pinned down like a dead butterfly to the narrow boundaries of love, horses, individual passions, trains, ships and bank-robbery. Woodie would be spinning in his grave.


A

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 01:17 PM

Most UK folkies are left wing, so they don't meet many of the opposition on folk clubs.
J

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 01:14 PM

John was right in saying that a thread with a non-specific title like "us and them" probably belongs in the non-music section. We require thread titles to reflect the contents of the thread, so I changed the title, and asked Jerry to approve it or suggest another.
But let's stick with the topic of the discussion:
I think I once read that the UK folk community thrived and the US folk community died, because the UK folkies kept politics out of their music. I don't know that I'd say that folk music in the land of Ewan MacColl is universally non-political, but perhaps there is some truth in the contention.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Us and Them: folk music and political persuasion
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 01:02 PM

BTW, I do admire the sneakiness of the clone who changed the title for you, to make it fit above the line.
It must be wonderful to be one of the in-crowd. :)

JM

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 12:59 PM

I, unlike some I could mention ;), refuse to comment on things about which I know little or nothing Jerry, and I know SFA about US politics.

John

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 12:38 PM

Hey, John:

I'll let Joe make that call. I guess I started this because of the uproar about whether or not Johnny Cash and/or Arlo Guthrie are really Republicans. The Us and Them principle is much more universal than music, but it rears it's head on this site, even being as homogeneous as it is. Above or below... makes no difference to me.

So what do you think about the topic, John?

Jerry

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: pdq
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 12:02 PM

Perhaps the Left-leaning folkies should take a hint: their material has a short shelf life.

I still love to listen to Doc Watson, Burl Ives, Ian & Sylvia and the original Kingston Trio lineup with Dave Guard.

There may be a few song by these people that are vaguely political, but they are timeless.

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 11:55 AM

Sorry, but this belongs below the line folks.

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 11:46 AM

We is all the "us"s and "Thems" rolled together. We's seek commonality despite the differences.

Jerry

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: Amos
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 11:32 AM

I think there is such a thing as a true We, which is the fundamental madcap dance that sweeps us all up, no matter which corner of the ballroom; and then, there is an endless roster of pseudo-groups, false groups, and artificial categories provided by others in an effort to keep life under control. The two versions of "We" are very different; one derives its existence from natural affinities and co-existence. The other depends for its being on a "Them" to resist, usually.

There is no "they" there.
E.C. Jessup, 1975

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 11:31 AM

And then of course, the terms Democrat, Republican, Conservative and Liberal mean very different things in other countries. Rest assured, every country has labels to use to castigate each other.

Jerry

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: Art Thieme
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 11:25 AM

Mostly, in-groups exist to be recognized by out-groups. It does seem to validate them on one level or another.

Politically, the system comes down to doing and saying just about anything to secure the all-powerful individual's VOTE in a given election. If ten million people vote for a stupid and completely wrong-headed thing, and 1000 people make the intellectually proper assumption, the people who are wrong get their way---and it IS the law.

Both, or all, of the various positions taken represent the the heartfelt feelings -- of one WE or another!

'Tis a quandary decidedly NOT to be wished---on anyone. And still, it is the best of all possible options if FREEDOM for the various peoples involved is to be respected and taken into account as the ideal for all.

Watch out for the tyrany of the WE!!

Just a thought or two.

Art

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: pdq
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 11:09 AM

A member of the Democratic Party is called a Democrat. Always has been.

It would sound silly to say "John Ewards is a Democratic".

Jerry Rasmussen did not use the term in any way except the normal one. Please re-read his post.

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: EBarnacle
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 10:33 AM

Jerry, you may have inadvertently raised another issue. Several times during your post you used the word "Democrat" in its Newspeak sense to refer to people who are Democratic or members of the Democratic Party.

I believe that this is something introduced by the Republicans several years ago to lessen the verbal relationship between Democrats and Democracy. Democrat, as in Democrat Party sounds more like an expletive than a descriptor.

On your main topic, I agree with you. There are far too many people and interest groups who use language to slice and dice us into easily managed, unthinking units.

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: Wesley S
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 10:20 AM

Ex-Speaker of the House Jim Wright once told me that in his day that Democrats and Republicans could argue all day about politics but still share a beer after it was all over and talk about other things. I'm afraid that just doesn't happen anymore. Until we can get back to that way of thinking I'm afraid that we're just going to butt heads and go nowhere.

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: olddude
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 09:11 AM

I lost a friend recently and it was one that I knew for years. He calls himself a Christian but everyday would send me and a host of others these non stop railings against gays, and against liberals and against women and the list goes on an on. I repeatedly tried to explain to him that it was not welcome, not productive and not the right path in life to pass on articles that do nothing but peddle hate. I finally lost it and told him he cannot ever email me or call me again. I just could not take it any further.   I only mention Christian because of this issue. I hear it from all types of people, those I have worked with, neighbors etc from all types of belief systems to no belief systems. I don't know when people will wake up and realized we are all in this boat called life. Unless we all start paddling, we are going to all sink ... you said it beautifully Jerry .. I have read no greater truth than what you just wrote.

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: Beer
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 08:54 AM

Good stuff Jerry. Work use to be much the same. Management was as ways referred to as them up there. They make the decisions, they are to blame and so on. Then one day I heard a Senior manger make the same comment so I said to this person, "But you are one of them, those that subordinates referee to.". That was about 10 years ago and she still doesn't speak to me. And I'm just a happy as I have been retired since 2001.
Beer (adrien)

Subject: RE: Us and Them
From: olddude
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 08:39 AM

beautifully said my friend

Subject: Us and Them
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 30 Jul 09 - 08:36 AM

Given a choice, would you rather be one of "us," or one of "them?" If you're one of us, you reinforce everything we believe in. You agree with us. That's very comforting. It's good to know that you're right. If you're one of them, you're misguided at best. More likely, you're looked upon as insensitive (in contrast to how sensitive we are,) selfish and downright delusional. You aren't logical. Given a choice, I'll take neither of the above. I've never been much for group-think.

It really doesn't make much difference what the criteria are for being one of "us." It can be being a Christian, being a Liberal (which is code for Democrat, as we all know Republicans can never have a liberal thought in their head.) gay or straight. The important thing is that you are not one of "them." I find all of this extremely stifling. When I am on a Christian web site and someone starts ranting about homosexuals, I quietly exit stage left.
When people seem to be talking to hear themselves talk rather than to carry on a respectful conversation, I make for the nearest exit, left or right.
When people on here talk as if you have to be a Democrat and be in lock step with every Liberal position to like folk music, I think of the wonderful friends I have who are thoughtful, generous, loving and socially responsible who are Republican, including some who used to frequent Mudcat. Just when did folk music become the property of Democrats?

People bemoan the fact that folk music isn't as popular as it was in the 60's (or claim that it is.) For the brief moment that folk music had national popularity in the fifties and sixties, it was folk music, not Democrat music. Sure, there were important political songs that fueled great movements in helping to forge alliances for social change. But if you look at the body of folk music, only a small percentage of it is political. When you have to be a card-carrying Democrat to be welcomed into the folk community you immediately eliminate half the folk.

Many years ago when I was running a folk concert series I noticed when I booked a bluegrass group, I got a completely different audience. At the end of a bluegrass concert, I asked the audience to tell to me on the way out why they never came to the folk concerts. The most common complaint I received was, "I don't want to sit around all evening listening to someone complain." I protested strongly that folk music is not primarily protest music, but to no avail. Like most perceptions about the difference between "us" and "them," "Them" was stereotyped in the most negative, simplistic way. I wrote an article titled Rednecks versus Protest Singers with tongue in cheek that was a collection of quotes of cliches and judgments I'd heard from the folk and non-folk communities. They sounded as simplistic and inflexible as those I hear about gays and non-gays, Christians and non-Christians, Liberals and non-liberals.
The minute you define yourself as not being someone else, you get intellectually lazy. So, do you want to be an intellectual, or a non-intellectual.

And the game goes on.

There's a much better choice than "us" or "them." It's called "we."
This country has gotten into the mess we have in large part because
"us" and them" has become "us" versus "them."

I bet Bascom Lamar Lunsford was a Republican. He was a lawyer, for God's sake! The only work he ever did with his hands was sticking them in someone else's pockets. Sounds stupid, don't it. And it is.
But no more foolish than the endless quest to divide people into warring factions.

What do you think?

Jerry