Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute – George Orwell
We’ve almost achieved 1984. Liberals are working tirelessly wiping out history, literature, and science to usher in Oceana and Big Brother. The New York Times (The Ministry of Truth) is doing their part and has decided classic rock is problematic and therefore must be canceled.
Check this out:
“As we take another look at the sins of our historical figures, we’ve also had to take a hard look at our more immediate past and present, including the behavior of the creators of pop culture,” writes @JennyBoylan. https://t.co/va2CjL9l04
— New York Times Opinion (@nytopinion) November 3, 2021
Yeah, the NYT is comparing rock ‘n roll to Confederate statues.
You should know that when liberals ask these type of question on whether something should be banished, they have already arrived at the answer: yes.
The past several years have seen a reassessment of our country’s many mythologies — from the legends of the generals of the Confederacy to the historical glossing over of slaveholding Founding Fathers. But as we take another look at the sins of our historical figures, we’ve also had to take a hard look at our more immediate past and present, including the behavior of the creators of pop culture.
That reassessment extends now to the people who wrote some of our best-loved songs. But what to do with the art left behind? Can I still love their music if I’m appalled by various events in the lives of Johnny Cash or Elvis or Jerry Lee Lewis? Or by Eric Clapton’s racist rants and anti-vaccination activism?
NYT writer Jennifer Finney Boylan has a problem with the personal lives of some performers and musicians and thinks because of that, their music deserves to be cancelled. She didn’t really give a lot of examples of this, but did single out “American Pie,” singer Don McLean. Apparently he was charged with but not convicted of domestic violence 29 years. In liberal terms, that’s a cancelling.
I’m not sure what Johnny Cash and Elvis did to offend this liberal writer, but obviously her beef with Jerry Lee Lewis was his habit of marrying his underage cousins. It should be noted that it was all perfectly legal at the time. Hate the laws, not the man.
In conclusion, Boylan writes:
For a lot of baby boomers, it’s painful to realize that some of the songs first lodged in our memories in adolescence really need a second look. And it’s hard to explain why younger versions of ourselves ever thought they were OK in the first place.
I want to live in a world where I can be moved by art and music and literature without having to come up with elaborate apologies for that work or for its creators.
But does such a world exist?
…
My guess is probably not. But it can help us to time travel, and not only to our adolescent past. Maybe reconsidering those songs, and their artists, can inspire us to think about the future and how to bring about a world that is more inclusive and more just.
So yes, taking a second look at and reconsidering classic rock means cancelling it. According to this left-wing lunatic, rock n’ roll is not inclusive or just enough to exist.
Here’s the thing, this kook and every liberal like her, loves Woody Allen and Roman Polanski, two liberal artists with a horrifying histories of child rape. If they won’t cancel these pedophiles, why does Don McClean have to go for yelling at his wife 3 decades ago?
I listen to so much music made by people I dislike on a personal level or who I disagree with politically and that’s okay. Axl Rose is a human piece of shit, but Appetite for Destruction is a brilliant record. I can separate the man from his art because I’m not uptight perpetually outraged liberal dingbat.
