Woke Rock - Evanescence & Garbage
Rock Musicians Submitting to Woke Agenda are Essentially Betraying the Rebel Spirit of Rock
Since I'm not just a political blogger but also a great fan of rock and metal music along with being an avid reader of fantasy and speculative fiction, I can now expose Woke rock musicians - Amy Lee and Shirley Manson - just like I exposed Woke fantasy and horror writers - Stephen King and Neil Gaiman - before. This is also my three-year old piece, by the way.
Wokeism permeates literally everything in Western society, and that's scary. Even the music bands who are supposed to do music and not Woke politics. That is, two famous rock bands whom I used to love in the past - Garbage and Evanescence - had plunged deep into Woke politics for last two years, and I consider it unacceptable as well.
Last Evanescence album 'Bitter Truth' from 2020 is openly political and openly Woke, and new Garbage album 'No Gods No Masters' from June 2021 is even worse. I respected Amy Lee and Shirley Manson before. I had lost all my respect for now, and I will not listen to both of these bands anymore. Not to their new records, at least, maybe to old great songs from time to time. But I do really believe musicians shouldn't do like that.
First of all, I don't think musicians should meddle into politics and lecture people on the issues they don't understand. The result of it is almost never great. Their job is to make music, not to do politics. I do understand that everyone is entitled to their own political opinions, but I also believe that those opinions should be expressed outside of the music. For example, JK Rowling had stated her opinions of trans activism as a private person, not in her books. Amy Lee and Shirley Manson began to use their songs as a political propaganda tool, and that's unacceptable.
But musicians always stated political opinions in songs, some people would say. Remember legendary The Beatles and John Lennon with his 'Imagine' which became almost Communist hymn. Remember rock stars from 70s and 80s, and so on. Surely, many of them were political as well?
Yeah, perhaps they were, but it was different. They were doing it very carefully and in very subtle way. They were singing mostly about things majority of people could relate, and avoided to mention current political events and to take sides. Lennon sang about peace, harmony, equality - basically, things which almost all people can relate to. Even if his context was somewhat Leftist, it was very subtle, and still relatable.
Evanescence and Garbage had done it otherwise. They openly mentioned current political events (BLM, Trump presidency) and openly TOOK SIDES (Woke side, pro BLM and anti-Trump and anti Republican ofc, pretty 'trendy'). This is already much worse - this is not relatable to all people, and speaks only to their Woke audience, by default excluding all possible Republican supporters and just independent liberals who aren't happy with BLM, CRT and Wokeism. So, Garbage an Evanescence began to bring division into their fanbase. Now, you need to be Woke if you want to listen to these bands. That's very wrong.
But it's worse. They are telling their fans in their songs what to think about current political events, and which side to take. Imagine young rock fans who are as apolitical as possible, and don't really understand all undercurrents of American politics at all, hearing their favouring band denouncing Trump and praising BLM and Antifa violence and riots? What would be their reaction? Ofc, they'd join in on this toxic bandwagon.
So, what Garbage and Evanescence are doing is not merely stating their political point. They could have just sent the general message of peace, equality and human rights, like Lennon did, not mentioning current political events openly, and not openly taking sides in these events. This way they would still have managed to make their point without dividing their fanbase and without telling people what to think of current political events, and whom to support.
But Garbage and Evanescence had chosen another way. They had chosen to use their music as a tool of political propaganda. How very, very disappointing.
P.S. I'm thinking maybe in truth Evanescence and Garbage, both old and almost forgotten bands, decided to play politics to attract attention to themselves and to remind fans of their existence? After all, people were not that interested about their music anymore at this point, so they thought they would buy them with trendy politics? How very, very disgusting.
There were always “protest” singers, usually in the folk music traditions, who sang about social issues, as far back as union anthems, the Dust Bowl and Great Depression, and post-war anti-nuke songs. Then came Viet Nam, the draft, the Summer of Love…There are some great ones as well as some best forgotten.
But that was before the oppressor-oppressed paradigm took over, before we stopped protesting for peace and humanity and against the military-industrial/ government complex, and started hating people.
Before we decided that our underlying humanity was less important than political affiliation.
Before we said to hell with the issues and lost the ability to think critically.
Before we decided that the messenger was more important than the message.
Before presenting the “correct” image became more important than causes and consequences.
The rock and roll graveyard is full of these victims; and luckily it’s a big space. There are only a few Bob Dylans and Pete Seegers and Phil Ochs in history, just a few Sam Cookes and Marvin Gayes. Their pointed and plaintive songs are the ones that live on, because they speak to our humanity and desire for a better world, instead of fomenting hatred and anger.
When I leave this world, I want my friends to remember me when they hear “What’s Going On,” not “American Idiot.”
Seeing that most musicians have to buy into the Freemason/ Satanist agenda, it’s is expected of them to promote this bullshit. That’s why the ones who try to expose things like child trafficking, Chris Cornell for example, are murdered.