Metal Storm logo
The attack on free speech, and censorship in metal.



Posts: 41   [ 1 ignored ]   Visited by: 120 users

Original post

Posted by Totenlieder, 08.09.2017 - 07:38
Right now things are heated when it comes to speech. Everywhere and music, especially metal is under attack by various leftist groups like Antifa.
This includes everything from concerts getting shut down because bands like Marduk and Inquisition have been accessed of being nazis or being sympathetic to nazi ideals. Just recently a band by the name of Nyogthaeblisz was recently kicked off of a show* due to the fact that they were accused of being white supremacists and nazis which is ironic due to the fact that they are Mexican. One reason because they have known to be anti semetic. This also brings up a hypocrisy problem. Be anti christian all you want but the moment you are anti islamic and anti judaism it's not allowed. This is rampant in the metal world. Next is labels. Hells Headbangers recently came under fire for having various nsbm bands on their label. Metalsucks posted the open letter to them ordering the cease and desist. Another label called Behold Barbarity which is one of the best small distros around, has recently been shut down due to the fact the owner of the label has put nsbm on the roster. His name, number, place of work, family members were all put online, exposed and he was shamed and defameted until he shut the distro down despite being a stand up guy. All those who know him know he's not a racist or nazi in anyway.
This doxxing and shutting down of free speech in metal is a threat to everyone. I believe that art has no boundaries. Music included. Extreme left or right, anti any religion, etc. From the murder, rape and necrophilia of death metal. Cop killing, fucking bitches and doing drugs of rap. To the anti judeo christian, nordic pride of black metal. All of it should be protected and havea platform for distribution. And it is possible to separate art from the artist. There's a difference between a band being against/for something and explicitly saying to their fans "do this specific thing"

*The band ended up playing the show under a different name without the venue knowing.
27.10.2017 - 00:37
Zombie94

I think it's unjustifiable to defend a band full of idiots who are promoting an ideology that led to one of the worst atrocities in human history. Even freedom of speech should have boundaries in my opinion. Many countries have decided that Nazi ideologies fall under this category. Citizens of these countries have continued to enjoy their freedom of speech in essentially all other areas.

I don't think the OP is genuinely concerned that a ban on nazi lyrics is going to hinder metal artists' freedom to express themselves. I think you're just using the forum as a vehicle to insert your political leanings (as Iron Angel covered very well above).
Loading...
28.11.2020 - 21:21
Lord Lanrac

ANTIFA = Another Name To Identify Failed Abortions
----
What is the difference between the man who fools you from the pulpit, and the other man who fools you from the platform?
Both of them seek to obtain power over you - To rule your mind, control your property interests or labor power.
Loading...
29.01.2021 - 00:36
DeliciousDishes
always right
I'm seeing now this thread somehow got revived. Huh.

"why are only NS/racist lyrics bad and not anti-christian or gory lyrics?"

The thing is this: Christians are in power (even though they love to pretend that they're oppressed). "Kill all Christians" is not gonna be great and popular politics. It's an edgy "mom get out of my room!!!" message. Same for very gory lyrics: "Kill everyone now" is not something that's gonna catch on in the public. Also as pointed out before the race vs. religion argument.

If you only care about music and "free speech", the thing is simply that NS bands build on established local NS scenes and they definitely do try to drive out and actively threaten people they dislike. See how Salem got treated when they started out for example. And that was over country borders. Especially in local scenes this is gonna be really harsh and just going to stop people from getting into the movement.
----
You are the hammer, I am the nail
building a house in the fire on the hill
Loading...
29.01.2021 - 01:08
Karlabos
Meat and Potatos
Shouldn't this thread be on discussions or something?
----
Rose is red, violet is blue. Flag is win, Baba is you.
Loading...
08.05.2021 - 19:42
Troy Killjoy
perfunctionist
Written by Karlabos on 29.01.2021 at 01:08

Shouldn't this thread be on discussions or something?

Yes, and it has now been relocated.
----
"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools because they have to say something."
Loading...
30.07.2021 - 22:44
Brutal Water

I'm sorry that I keep reviving old topics lately, but I just wanted to add my $0.02

I believe in and support freedom of speech. The Nazis did not. Therefore I feel like NSBM stuff is incompatible with freedom of speech. (I'm talking about the "original" Nazis here, not any post-war wannabes.)

Nazis loved to label all sorts of stuff as "degenerate art" and banned (and often burned) it. Of course metal wasn't around back then, but I'm 100% positive that they would have deemed metal "degenerate art" and banned it as well, and even shipped some of the more vocal musicians off to the concentration camps. If you were a conscious objector, you were a traitor to the fatherland. My own great-grandfather was a mayor and became a conscious objector. He had to resign and learn to keep his mouth shut to stop the death threats against his family. He was as Austrian as they come, yet that didn't matter to the Nazis. So much for freedom of speech. To me it just doesn't make sense to support both metal and Nazis at the same time. The latter would have immediately destroyed the former. Or as the Dead Kennedys put it: "In a real 4th Reich, you'll be the first to go."

That said, I don't see the problem with Marduk, or other non-NSBM bands for that matter. Singing about Nazis, the Holocaust and WWII doesn't automatically make you a Nazi. Some people are merely interested in the subject matter and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. After all, it's our duty to remember the Holocaust and make sure everything is documented to maintain awareness for future generations. Marduk is doing pretty much that in their own way.
----
That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.
Loading...
31.07.2021 - 00:06
nikarg
Mod
^ Thank you for this post.
Loading...
31.07.2021 - 01:31
Brutal Water

Written by nikarg on 31.07.2021 at 00:06

^ Thank you for this post.

No problem. I'm glad you agree.

Being Austrian I just feel very strongly about this particular subject. It's the darkest chapter of my country's history and learning about it in detail in high school (including a field trip to Mauthausen, the worst and most grueling concentration camp of them all) makes you learn to appreciate the freedom we enjoy nowadays.

Hell, the Nazis even banned the Krampus for being Pagan. I fucking love the Krampus! It's probably the most metal tradition we have!
----
That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.
Loading...
31.07.2021 - 02:59
Troy Killjoy
perfunctionist
True free speech, in its purest form, means supporting the potential, at its worst, for anyone to espouse values that support racism, call for violence, and purposely spread misinformation with malicious intent. And that doesn't make you a racist or violent or malicious person. It just means you acknowledge that others who are will be free (in a legal sense, at least) from any repercussions for doing so.

Yet curtailing said freedom by an authoritarian/totalitarian regime begets the slippery slope of paving the road to Hell. Everyone thinks they're on the "good side" and wants to either silence the others themselves or have government do it on their behalf, leading to a continuous furthering of power for the elites over the people. But to fight for the existence and maintenance of free speech means openly embracing the heinous possibilities therein, even if you romanticize the optimism of hoping for a self-respecting, self-policing society.
----
"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools because they have to say something."
Loading...
31.07.2021 - 04:12
Brutal Water

(I posted a lot of rambling here yesterday while tired, so I decided today to edit the whole thing down and rephrase it for the sake of brevity and coherence.)

I understand and respect your point about free speech requiring to allow opponents of free speech to voice their opinions as well. I'm no politician and as I'm not a member of the MS staff either, I have no say in the matter of whether neo-Nazis should be allowed to have their own political platform or be represented on this website.

As far as politics go, Nazi ideology is banned in my country. Seeing as we carry a good chunk of the responsibility, I'm sure everybody will understand the ban in Austria. If we'd allow neo-Nazis to run a party, we would likely be facing worldwide sanctions and hate. As valuable as free speech is, IMO this ban is justified for the sake of not making today's citizens suffer the consequences of our ancestors' mistakes.

Personally I would give them the permission to run a party, because I doubt they'll get the 4% of votes required to get into government. We do have a Communist party and the highest they ever got was 1.5%. This is just a wild guess, but I believe a significant amount of these votes come from disappointed citizens who wanted to show their displeasure with the other, "larger" parties at the time. A potential Nazi party would probably not surpass the Communist party in votes either; I'd expect them to receive mostly votes from disgruntled citizens and a few edgelords.

Regarding whether or not NSBM bands should be featured on MS, again, this decision is out of my hands. From a company's standpoint, this would entail some extra work for very little reward (and some of the "reward" would likely include losing a certain amount of disgusted users). Just like in politics, it's simply not worth the trade-off. Not to mention that several countries would block this website for featuring pro-Nazi lyrics, which would cost you even more users.

Personally I don't like NSBM (to put it mildly), but I'm not gonna go out of my way to try and have them banned in any way, shape or form. Attempting to do so would draw more attention to these bands which is the last thing I want. Instead I'll just let them do their thing, ignore them out of existence and not take them seriously as songwriters. (After all, it takes zero effort to shock people by simply saying "Sieg Heil", whereas a certain amount of imagination and creativity is required to write songs like "Necropedophile" or "Stripped, Raped and Strangled".)

NSBM bands can go ahead and write whatever lyrics they want. I'm sure they're aware that they themselves will then be responsible for being locked out from a lot of places (both internet and real world). I believe in second chances and will gladly give them the time of day when they abandon their ideologies and try to be taken more seriously as musicians. Until then, it will be their own fault for being shut down.

tl;dr

It comes down to how the whole world as a collective feels about this subject. But even if everybody would gladly allow Nazis to speak their mind (as long as it's really just speaking and not acting), free speech doesn't force you to actually support their opinions. You will still be free to disagree with them and can with a clean conscience refuse to give them your vote (or money).

In regards to your point about a self-policing world, I don't doubt for a second that if the entire world would be open enough to let opponents of free speech say whatever they want, they would never support their opinions.
----
That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.
Loading...
18.08.2021 - 10:57
IronAngel

Written by Troy Killjoy on 31.07.2021 at 02:59

True free speech, in its purest form, means supporting the potential, at its worst, for anyone to espouse values that support racism, call for violence, and purposely spread misinformation with malicious intent. ---

Yet curtailing said freedom by an authoritarian/totalitarian regime begets the slippery slope of paving the road to Hell.


This is a false dichotomy, and just not empirically true. Slippery slope fallacies rarely are. Speech has been regulated in virtually every society, and the very existence of societies (basically most of them at some point) that have moved from more restrictions to less restrictions (e.g. regarding freedom of the press, religious dissent etc.) is proof that restrictions do not inevitably (or even typically) lead to ever more restrictions. Societies have been perfectly capable of moving in both directions on the free speech spectrum, as warranted by circumstances.

Political parties, for instance, have been outlawed at particular times in history, and that may have saved the respective societies from serious disruption. (E.g. when the threat of communist revolution, puppetteered by the USSR, was thought to be acute in Finland, or when a fascist movement started directing violence toward former presidents and marching on the capitol). In other times and circumstances, the same restrictions may no longer be warranted.

As for what "true free speech, in its purest form" means, I guess that's a definitional question. When you take a concept, any concept, you define its conditions. You might say "free speech" means a state in which the maximum positive freedom is realized, i.e. the maximum diversity of view points is actually being expressed without fear. Or you might say it means a minimum of legal restrictions. (The two are practically irreconcilable, when people use their formal freedom to informally curtail others' freedom.) Or whatever. It's not like "true free speech" is some pre-existing Platonic idea that we have to analyze and adhere to, it's a political ideal whose content we are free to define.

Either way, freedom of speech is a pragmatic value: it is good for social stability and happiness that people are fairly free to express themselves and don't feel unjustly restricted. At the same time, the best overall outcome is not usually achieved by going to the logical limits of a concept, but by striking a good balance between different values and interests. The law of diminishing returns applies. We will want enough freedom of speech to reap most of its benefits, but there will be a point after which very little benefit is gained (e.g. the happiness of a few Nazis) and a lot of harm is done (e.g. whatever negative consequences follows from a few Nazis, such as more Nazis).

Such a cost-benefit analysis, nebulous as it may be, is also a direct antidote to a "slippery slope": there is also a point, in the other direction, after which restrictions on freedom of speech cause more social dissent, loss of productivity, and unhappiness than the supposed benefits. Just because some governments may be prone to disregard such analysis doesn't mean we can't make warranted, informed decisions about the sweet spot. Despots gonna despot, just don't elect them. (And in the current political landscape, the likeliest despots will be voted in on a free speech platform, ironically.)
Loading...