What about Live 8 and Live Aid before that?
Without Bob Geldof going all political, how many lives would have been lost if the famine in Africa had have been left to the polititions?

But that was using music to actually make a difference, and a difference that couldnt be argued with. No one could say that wasnt helping, that they were doing that to boost their own sales. Too many musicians have turned being all anti-governent into almost a fashion statement now. Fleh.

oh god!!...and you know this how?! you're friends with them and they told you?....they are just expressing their opinion of the current political situation, they are obviously intrigued by it and found inspiration from it......for god's sake, stop dissing green day people! just because they changed their sound and they're not "punk" anymore doesn't mean they're not making good music, personally i think american idiot is their best album.....

Personally, I think American Idiot sucks ass. And personally, I also think that they've just jumped on the whole "I HATE BUSH AND ANARCHY ROX MY SOX" thang. How else are they selling more records? To me (and many many others) they're not making better music, all else thats changed is that he now wears eyeliner and sings more about politics.

But anyway, this is NOT another effing Green Day thread.

I understand what you are saying AITA. That the bands did it for humanitarian reasons and I also agree that too many have jumped on the anti-government bandwagon.
My point is... that Geldof had to apply a lot of pressure on certain governments just to get them on board in the first place.
He virtually had to shame them into action. Governments were largely apathetic at the time (Live Aid) and without his enthusiasm Africa faced a humanitarian disaster.

Im sure there are plenty of bands who do it to make a difference, and I think its great of them to try it. Only thing is, there are too many bands who are in it purely for the record sales, so there's no real profit for those that really mean it.

But yes, Geldof made a hell of an impact, and good on him for being so persistent.

Ok, after typing all this out several times in order to get some good-lookin English out of it, my answer is so vague it makes no difference anyway. I guess, yeah, musicians should be political, but obviously not for their own needs. Course, there's no way of knowing at all, so the best bet is to let em do it. Some places need all the help they can get, and beggars cant be choosers.


*Sigh* Gimme a break, I had 7 hours of travelling today.

Truth is AITA I'm not even sure that musicians should get involved in politics at all.
That's why I started this thread, as to hopefully cause some lively debate in order to come to a personal conclusion. I guess the answer is'nt going to be black & white. :)

Exactly. Both good and bad will come from it. The good is obviously, the positive influence it's gonna have on the listeners. The bad, being ignorant kids running around screaming "F*CK THE GOVERNMENT", and bands singing about something they dont particularly care about, just to boost record sales.

Not all politically-driven bands are mere "anti-government" toting extremists. Some actually sing and write about specific world issues, which I think in principle is a great thing for any kind of art, regardless of whether there is a political "agenda" or whether I agree or disagree with it. As humans, we're inevitably going to form and discuss opinions/commentary on social and political aspects. As listeners, there's nothing that says we have to agree or even care. There's alot of preachy bands out there, but in most cases, I can still enjoy the music, even if I don't agree (or in some cases fully understand) what their "agenda" is.

Brief vague, passing comments on the war and GWB doesn't give me much insight on BJA's "opinion of the current political situation." It's quite similar to those that claim Eminem's last album had efforts of political messages. Saying things like "f*ck Bush" is not political. Even Rock Against Bush seemed like uninspired and uninformed bullying to me.

I think when you boil all of it down, if an artist is into his work and means what they sing about (wether political or not) then that is what is important. Whenever bands just jump on the popularity wagon, then thats when things turn south. And while people may speculate on wether a band has "sold-out" into a particular movement or trend, I think its hard to clearly define if some bands have done this or not. On the other hand, some are glaringly obvious.

People should write songs that they mean and believe in. Thats what music is about. :)