this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
740 points (96.6% liked)

politics

19107 readers
3170 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] banneryear1868@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Even if you give him full benefit of the doubt, the fact the right could adopt this as an anthem against his intentions shows how milquetoast the song is, and how he's failed to communicate the meaning he wants the song to have.

[–] nxdefiant@startrek.website 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

They adopted Fortunate Son too, and that one's obviously not for them

[–] Grant_M@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago
[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

As well as "Born in the USA"

[–] banneryear1868@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Fortunate Son is definitely anti-war in context but I'd say it suffers the same vagueness, the lyrics are more about solidarity with soldiers and against preferential treatment for politician's soldiers, which are moral causes often appealed to by the right. They've also had their own "complicated relationship" with displaying the confederate flag which also adds to this. Other anti-Vietnam war songs like "I Ain't Marching Anymore" are a lot more radical anti-war sentiments, one reason why Fortunate Son is so ubiquitous is because it is vague enough and allows people to impart meaning on it just enough.

Another interesting song that toes this line is "The Night They Drove Ol Dixie Down" which is a character piece of a confederate solder at the end of the civil war, with the chorus in major key it suggests an anti-war sentiment but people have also confused it for southern nostalgia.

Should a song be direct or vague? If you want to communicate a specific message like Oliver Antony and get upset when it's misinterpreted then yes, in CCR and The Band's case it's about expressing an emotion or painting a scene. However so many of the classic working class songs like "Which Side Are you On" cannot be misunderstood because they directly pose the political question. One of Dylan's biggest criticisms from the left at the time was his vague lyrics, vs folk singers like Seeger and Ochs were directly addressing heavy political subjects in their lyrics.