Ban of Rock and Metal in the USSR

Why did the USSR and the rest of the warsaw pact(idk about central europe, but in my country, the People's Republic of Bulgaria, banned all rock and metal as being "degenerate bourgeois and fascist music") ban rock and metal? How was it a bourgeois influence when the vast majority of rock and metal fans were bourgeois, and a lot rock music had major anti-imperialist or anti-capitalist themes(John Lennon and , as well as the majority of its listeners being working class?
What makes this hypocritical is that at the same time ballet and classical music was kept in high regard, when these arts are to this day just entertainment for decadent and pretentious nobles and the grande bourgeosie, as well as them being patrons of them.

Attached: bannedinUSSR.jpg (355x355, 18.59K)

Other urls found in this thread:


shut the duck up liberal and watch this

rock and roll is literally cia


The fans may not have been porkies, but the musicians were. Rock music is fascist. It was a CIA PSYOP.

Liberal hippie bullshit, lots of anti-communism mixed in ("You say you need a revolution…").

The USSR did fail to promote new proletarian music to an extent, but shitty boomer noises were not the answer.

This kind of music is socially organized (in orchestras, practice sessions, etc) and performed by everyone. In comparison, the kind of music that is distinctly stamped with the approval of the bourgeoisie is rock music that focuses on stardom and expropriates musical performance from the masses. Orchestral music was accessible to all in socialism. Would you complain also that the socialists preserved beautiful tzarist architecture and made it accessible to all instead of demolishing it and replacing it with bourgeois skyscrapers?

also, enjoy

It was a generation gap an culture war BS, not an ideological question.

t Silent Generation

Classical music requires unsessicary amounts of labor compared to rock. This is a good thing, not a bad thing.

No their is a of of smaller bands and shit.

Yes, a lot of traditional architecture is shit, and skyscrapers are not only cool, but allow for high density cities.

You have to be retarded to think this with maybe a few exceptions.


>Rock music is fascist.

By that logic classical, baroque and ballet is reactionary.
Show me rock lyrics that promote faschism

If you ban an entire genre, you make it a forbidden fruit for the people to smuggle and discredit your regime. This is what happened.

For the amusement of nobles.
The same criticism could be leveled at soviet era estrada singers like kobzon.

Also classical music is pretentious as shit and pretentiousness is bourgeois.

The sound is not the sole determination of the genre, lyrical content clearly defines genre as well. Look at all the consternation over "genre mixing" between hip hop and country lately. The only thing that tells you the genres have been mixed is the lyrical content.
As well, sounds have ideological content. Read Adorno.

Why are you commenting on rock music if you haven't listened to any? Just fuck off.

Yes, it was poorly handled, like everything under the revisionists.

Weird, I didn't know the nobles owned the orchestras in the Soviet Union.

Classical music is beautiful. You are a philistine.

Please bring the ban on Trots back. Skyscrapers are NOT efficient, they waste too much energy on elevators and stairs. There's a reason the Soviets had limits on how high buildings could get.

Musicians who create their own record companies, maybe. The vast majority of musicians suffer from suffocating contract deals and never reach superstar level in their lives, have to work jobs in the meantime, and so on.

Hot take.

The fact that the CIA got involved with certain art forms, artist groups, etc. doesn't make whole genres, art forms, or countries of origins PSYOPs.

"Controlling" the media is not the same as being the omnipresent puppeteer of every musician.

I agree with this.

I'm not sure this isn't the case.

Composed or "classical" music has the most artistic care put into it, the most work put behind. The fact that you don't like it talks volumes about your condition as a thinking and judging being. The soviet's approach of bringing the high arts to the masses was the right one and pretty much all communists dealing with the topic came to the same conclusion.

They may as well be. How can you seriously be arguing that pop music isn't bourgeois propaganda? And call yourself a Marxist? Hell, a Chomskian could understand this. Are you a child?


Attached: hoxha.jpg (571x235, 64.36K)

Propaganda would require a conscious effort. If you refer to, say, rapper niglets with their bisshez and hoez, cool cars and golden necklases n' shieet, that's not propaganda. That's just ideology.

Jesus Christ you guys are as fun as patch of dirt.

No it doesn't. If you are taught propaganda all your life and then you repeat what you are taught, there is no conscious effort, but it is still propaganda. And music stars are all selected by the bourgeoisie for the messages they send. Including the Beatles.

Yes it is. There was a concerted effort in the hip-hop industry to (in some cases literally) kill off and suppress class conscious rappers and replace them with bourgeois propaganda.

Banning a musical genre is reactionary

this coming from a Stalinstache?


Literally impossible. The whole education system would implode in seconds. This is a George Orwell-tier (that is, brainlet-tier) understanding of totalitarianism.


Attached: 0cc.jpg (633x640, 47.16K)

Stalin listened to Death Grips, Scatman John, Deafheaven, the dude was cutting edge. Fucking Kruschevites tossed out all the cool shit and replaced it with Bureaucrats, Middle Managers, and Taylor Swift/ 6ix9ine shit. Fucking disgraceful.

The fact that you actually believe this bullshit proves you were taught propaganda all your life. Read a book.

No u.

Attached: galtsev.gif (480x348, 2.87M)

the major metal bands in western countries have always produced much propaganda against the state and agitated for revolutionary causes. same goes for rap music, punk, etc etc. just because such things eventually get co-opted does not mean porky didnt shit their pants worrying about it. they over and over tried to tank their revolutionary potential (to much success in almost every case) by plying them with bad record deals, drugs, whores, and whatever would make them stay fucked up enough to be useless. they wouldnt have to get metallica bitching about file sharing if metallica didnt start poor, drunk, middle class retards who spoke out against war. pop punk wouldnt exist if kurt cobain and his tranny grunge friends werent queering up the youth and talking about rape just a decade before. all popular music can be seen as counter-culture, corruption, and then integration. it goes from being counter to just being the culture itself until all meaning of it is lost. that's why they can play antiwar vietnam songs right back to back with the indulgent feel good garbage: it dilutes the anger, puts people in unnatural feelings whiplash.
porky doesn't have to produce overt propaganda all the time. if anything, desensitizing people and baffling them work better than straightforward 'kill opposition, reward mouthpieces' method you're describing.
it's much easier to promote the opposition and your lackey all the same; then people can't make up their mind. if the system accepts critiques (even though it really isn't) then there can be some malformed hope, working inside the system to fix it. every bit of hope makes a new generation of drugged out idiots good at making music who will eventually get co-opted. look at jello biafra: his whole band sold out and pushed him aside to put a sarcastic song comparing yuppies to the khmer rouge in a levis commercial. it isn't in anybody's material interest to say no to riches and comfort, especially when you think youve earned it fairly. it is insane for someone to stick with principles; its totally understandable where the incentives lead musicians.
in a way that user is right: porky already has power. they don't need to sustain making overt propaganda and indoctrination… superstructure from base, man. the society's means of production dictates that culturally, people will not question the ideological foundations fully. you can be lazy and say it is all conscious propaganda, but it's not. it's the ideological undercurrent, the reality of commodifying everything, nothing more or less.

Attached: 1544817323329.jpg (1200x798, 257.21K)

Do you also think that the Clash were bad?

The band's political sentiments were reflected in their resistance to the music industry's usual profit motivations; even at their peak, tickets to shows and souvenirs were reasonably priced.[45] The group insisted that CBS sell their double and triple album sets London Calling and Sandinista! for the price of a single album each (then £5), succeeding with the former and compromising with the latter by agreeing to sell it for £5.99 and forfeit all their performance royalties on its first 200,000 sales.[104] These "VFM" (value for money) principles meant that they were constantly in debt to CBS, and only started to break even around 1982.[1]>>2895780

Attached: Clash_21051980_12_800.jpg (800x468, 64.39K)

You are the one adding this modifier, not me. I never implied all propaganda is "overt," to the contrary, the signature of modern propaganda is that it attempts to disguise itself. Brainlets ITT are butthurt because it implicates their favorite tee vee shows.

Spooked conservative Hoxha

Honestly thier 1977 debut and Combat Rock remain as some of my favorite albums of all time.

So what practical solution do you have today? I don't think you could get people to stop being interested in contemporary media, even if it's quality is in your opinion bad or if it has the ideological undercurrent of supporting anti-communist shit. As if capitalists have any issues displaying anti-capitalist messages into their own media. If anything having anti-communist propaganda deludes it's actual strength by making it mundane and banal. Just like being a radlib is today.

Attached: 1430837912739.jpg (311x278, 28.4K)

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (640x426, 425.22K)

Given these reasons, I wouldnt be surprised that the soviet union banned DnD for being satanic.

unless the content of what you consume is overtly consumerist, imperialist, and the like how can you even critique it as propaganda for the established order? if everything is propaganda, nothing is kosher. all is haram. so you should gtfo this board and kys then, because everything is capitalism and you can't consume anything capitalist.
you are just engaging in ad hoc innuendo to be elitist and act all detached. it's not a gotcha moment, dude.
it is precisely because things mostly can go one way or another that you can tell they are not conscious propaganda. that a propagandistic theme is produced autonomously makes it not propaganda. if you reduce it that way, often you miss the underlying contradiction. this is where knowing some derrida really opens ones eyes to contradictions: lots of media that people argue as pro-establishment is so overtly propagandistic that it stops acting as a rational promotion and more like an ironic critique of its theme. the very refutation of the claim is present in the methods and arguments used to prove it. you can see this happen a lot, where the establishment's croneys, their underlings who are supposed to replicate cultural indoctrination quite competently deconstruct (usually via too literally carrying the message) the whole message making it obnoxious and overbearing.
all social orders save for the most authoritarian are very flimsy; the western media is so fucking flimsy since it can only indoctrinate people to a point. it has to be absent and allow autonomy or be vague on the assumption of faith that the indoctrination works, and that free people will simply accept at face value the narratives they craft. at times if it were too effective and obvious, it wouldnt work. not only is subtlety ineffective, it also makes inventive subversions of the norms easier, and every time that happens, porky has to try and integrate and mutate it to their purposes (see: feminist gillette ads, burger king depression ads). its pretty obvious to people that something is advertisement behind an ideological subversion except when ads have become so vague, nobody even knows what is being sold… these attempts don't work well! they prove that porky can only go so far trying to manufacture consent.
in being vague it emboldens dissent. the contradictions of todays world show this fraying at the edges, the distortion and total subjectification of meaning that comes with this way of making propaganda. that's why it's meant to even out, why they need controlled opposition to keep the whole of public sentiment from tipping to one side or another. perhaps even porky knows that inevitably this line of invention in propaganda can only work for so long before it stops passing as authentic.
you are pretty dumb imo if you dont think theres a difference between analysis and looking for spooks everywhere. case to case basis, every piece of media is different and isnt discountable just because it was produced under a certain social structure. if that were true, all but a handful of media ever made was produced coercively.
heres a good lefty fag tube video about a piece of media unraveling and desconstructing itself:

hahaha wonder what roger waters thought of that

i wouldnt be surprised if they didnt ban it.
imblying religion

The solution is to inoculate people against it through criticism and exposing them to the lies in the bourgeois media. Especially easy if you are in communism.

They have very serious issues with genuine anti-capitalism in media. There is absolutely NO serious Marxism or communism in MSM OR "alternative" media. What they do have is a sheepdog fake left, which detourns anti-capitalist sentiment into social democracy, petty booj anarchism, activism, culture wars, etc.

Yet you don't even recognize the existence of anti-communist propaganda in the media! As soon as the propaganda is disguised, you say "no propaganda here!"

What sekrit bourgeois fascist propaganda does DnD have? Even racial supremacy?


I mean that the Komsomol committee that made this list would probably agree with evangelical christians on moral matters.

Its ironic that the music that evangelical christians raged against were actually banned for the same reason the evangelical christians gave for banning them.

Yeah you're right. I had a very brain-dead take. Thanks comrade.
I'm not being sarcastic, I was just being a moron.

On one hand we shouldn't pretend media exists in a vacuum and intelligence agencies havent dipped their fingers into it but on the other we shouldn't hold any pretensions that everything state officials of the USSR did was out of pure indiluted communism. It's not anti-communist or anti-soviet to acknowledge that decisions to ban this or that type of music is policy enacted out of mundane social conservatism.
Quite frankly, I don't consider this a meaningful mark against socialism. Soviet boomers in the government didn't like metal so they banned it - big deal.

It's your problem if you think the bourgeois media is "everything."

Maybe if I was in a religion. You seem awfully offended by media criticism. Have you done any of the required reading to post with a flag like that? Do you think critically about ANYTHING you consume?

The overt propaganda not only WORKS for a large segment of viewers, but it also serves as a foil for the COVERT propaganda. Hence all the people ITT claiming that if it's not bald eagles and F-35s, it's not propaganda. Hence so many "Neither Washington nor Moscow" "dissidents."

Now it's the "incompetent bourgeoisie" theory, which is bourgeois propaganda. The Western media is not "fucking flimsy," if it was, it would not dominate the entire planet. It would not dominate the thoughts of so many Westerners 24/7 to the exclusion of anything material.

Not an argument, fuck you.

Damn, talk about missing the point completely.

Anti-communist or not, "Dissident Aggressor" kicked whole worlds of ass. Ironically, their latest album Firepower is loudly, unabashedly leftist.

"Leftism" is abashed.

Banning is media is absolutely wrong and useless though.

The soviet leadership didnt seem to have a good knowledge of how media consumption works. they seemed to think that people are like animals that could be effectively cordoned off from something harmful. Is western music propaganda? ban it. Are western movies propaganda? Ban them!

Banning something is a sign of weakness, as if you can't reply to criticism. Do we socialists really want to show as being too weak and believing that the masses lack critical thinking that we should ban media against us instead of responding to it?

They didn't ban all of it except when it first came out. Later most of it was banned because most songs were full of anarchist-libertarian edge in the lyrics. Songs like I Wanna Rock (for example) encouraged spurning the establishment… just for kicks, and portrayed things like parents and schools are stuffy and 'holding you back'. This may have been applicable to the West where capitalism made families and school a disaster to be in, but in the USSR school and family was considered a very important and respected thing and therefore such brash disregard for those things being shown and heard by soviet people was something they wanted to avoid. A more anecdotal example is teachers from the USSR who moved to the West to teach. Many of them were stunned at the brazen lack of respect for teachers and moreover the complete lack of rights teachers had both with students and as a career in general. And they were right to fear it because we got things like Igor Talykov who wrote tons of anti-soviet shit (while also ripping off music from Western musicians).
Talykov's example is very well known as pointed out by tubusshow

The youth of the USSR, hearing this 'brilliant' shit that was essentially 'fug uthority' were influenced by this, letting trickles of pro-capitalist sentiment in which snowballed into betrayal and pro-capitalists like Gorby getting control.

You're not going to get the average prole to hate and tear down all the movies and TV shows they like. In a world without religion, and without community because of zoning laws, media is literally all people have for comfort.

Apparently not.

That's not a common thing, that's an anomaly. the USSR should allow all the shit just because of 1 band?

Attached: Idealism.jpeg (151x225, 10.21K)

it was s different time back then, when it was new and confused allot of the boomers. but today we should inow better, how many working class proles actually like to listen to metal and rap.

Ideology is a material force when it grips the minds of the masses.


Stop putting words in my mouth, you're only making yourself look like a fool. Nowhere did I say that Rock put Gorb into power, only that it, among other influences (such as Khurschev's Secret Speech or Solzhenitsyn's books), incited revisionism and doubt of socialism which gave closet pro-capitalists footholds into the political sphere of the USSR. This began to collect and fester until it finally burst when Gorby got power and thus allowed pro-capitalism to start actively being worked into the economy, even if it was 'guised as "a return to Lenin".

This is why Trots need to be banned, they have to have every little fucking thing explained out to them… and even then they don't pay attention. But what should we expect from people who follow the ideology of a person who flip-flopped on positions constantly.

TL;DR: Rock is an anti-socialist influence among many that caused revisionism that cascaded into the dissolution of the USSR.

This is how all opportunists argue, like high school bullies.

Attached: bordiga8.png (1198x1091, 944.3K)

Read Lenin.

no u

Only if they act on it, which an empowered people, like under a socialist system, might.

Lets put rock aside for a moment and discuss metal. Metal is a highly political genre with bands from pretty much every ideology. I'm all for suppressing the right-wing types within metal, but there is also a significant far-left movement within metal. The metal community as a whole has been trying to purge the reactionaries anyways by calling in bomb threats to their concerts and violently protesting.

Here is a side-project of a bunch of well-known metal musicians that's dedicated to brutally mocking the alt-right called neckbeard deathcamp :

what is this liberal bullshit

NO it wasn’t. They were plenty of reactionaries who fought in the Red Army, not for ideological, but economic reasons.

Lol talking heads writing a great anti-capitalist anthem in "Everybody wants to rule the world" and it gets banned in the USSR.
Also what song says the Soviets are a military danger?

That was Tears For Fears user…
t. really oldfag


Everything fun from the west is bourgoies.

Attached: 1446737992797[1].png (336x355, 207.99K)

Reminder that Nixon said that the Communists were wrong that the West would lose its morals and you have all sorts of degeneracy because of Capitalism.

Who made that list?

Saying that the bourgeoisie control the media is not the same thing as saying that a particular art form can only ever serve bourgeois interests. There’s literally no reason why something like rock music can’t deliver a socialist message, especially within a socialist state. By your logic books should be banned under socialism because the bourgeoisie control the publishing industry.

Wouldn't the legitemately leftist, experimental and underground bands of the time be considered more dangerous than the pacified popular rock selling an artificial and empty image of rebellion?

Think of bands like The Pop Group and This Heat which in their lyrics provide an understanding of Marx and as an overarching project can be considered a situationist detournment of rock. Is the USSR going to fuck with this like they wouldn't with any artist in any other medium?

i'd say refer to
The USSR just banned it all for good measure

That's not what i'm saying, i'm saying that actual revolutionary leftist bands would be in disinterest to the USSR, and would prefer pacified rock churned out of the cultural industry but with a message and lyrical change.

You mean like the Color Revolutions? Those empty artificial calls for rebellion leads to those kinds of things.

STOP listening to rock and roll, the electric gee-tar is literally the stringed Jew™. Listen only to Tangerine Dreams.

Attached: varg_STOP-.jpg (608x464, 107.71K)

you werent making any distinctions and declared,
so if you believe that, even independent labels, individuals, venues, promotions… its all owned by the bourgeoisie, no matter what qualification. "everything" is your word and now youre moving the goalposts.
if you think in absolutes like you do, you might very well be ideologically marxist but totally uninterested in praxis or even maintaining scientific rigor in dialectic.
you havent critiqued anything. you just have declared "peoples favorite tee vee shows" as taboo because you believe that everyone is porky's servants except you, presumably, since we can't use your arguments reliably without assuming you are not also bought by porky.
you just seem to be yelling at walls. i dont think the propaganda works, and if you believe porky is potent, then you should stop blaming their propaganda. their hegemony is maintained not because of their own power but through the generational, material process of bribing their servants and collaborators. just because americans are preoccupied with our own retarded media apparatus, doesnt mean its somehow inherently good at what it does or better. your personal fixation with it- and culture you dislike- discounts how incompetent and full of holes it is. youre willing to just reduce people to being braindead for being duped by it (which they arent lmao) when it doesnt even serve a purpose of indoctrination, or as you said
music, art, television, cable news… whatever the fuck, its all made with varying porky involvement and influence. they are case to case issues and deserve to analyzed on their own terms. it indeed has to be overt propaganda with a proper criteria and tests as a matter of categorical clarity, or else everything is propaganda because you can simply argue it on arbitrary grounds to be so. thats some lazy shit, my dude… its a fun way to cuck yourself into total irrelevance for being a luddite. you have this understanding of the superstructure that is very narrow and ignores the autonomy of people and how the base causes society to craft culture… it isn't so deterministic and linear.
if the western media is so very successful, why does it have to rebrand itself every few decades? why are they always so far behind the social development of the actual populace? it only works as well as it can match the currents that exist in society. just because something is a paper tiger doesn't mean it gets defeated easily: it's precisely because it is a paper tiger that the collective wills and believes to be a real tiger that it succeeds. it is only through many disparate and tenuous mechanisms that it manages to retain its power.
you are ignoring some of the context im placing in the argument. there is a genuine fear of democracy from those in the ruling class; why do they suppress it even when it has risks? why put so much effort into convincing people they are the most "free" out of all nations, that labor will make you rich, and that voting matters when you and i know all of that is idealism? precisely because it is a lie they must promote it. ideology is that which cannot be questioned; the ideological sentiment of democracy makes no sense for them to promote since it ends in misery.
the conflicting ideological foundations of the system are methods by which to deconstruct and attack it. the bourgeoisie incompetence is that they cannot actually craft narratives with their social power alone. they need to manufacture consent and simulate democracy. what they are good at is accumulating capital, not being popular.
you must be a liberal if you're sincerely thinking people cynically accept everything fox news opines on, consequently because youre a hypocrite who believes everything cnn or msnbc reports. people may take cursory reinforcing of their bias from such sources, but the biases are being preyed on, not created by media.

you are legit retarded, there are so many artists who do the same. instead of "read a book" how about go listen to some punk music. you are out of touch with common people… get off of your high horse, come out of the ivory tower, and interact with human beings.

Attached: 1500502560464.jpg (283x380, 36.23K)

Oh no, its not like we all have gays fucking on the streets etc, its not planned degeneracy at all.

I'm out of touch with common people… even as I live and daily interact with them… fuck off m8. Your nebulous statement of "many of them do it" is retarded and ignores massive amounts of context on the situation.

Based. Just listened to Exit a few days ago, great album.

Even if the fans and musicians weren't bourgeoisie, the record labels and television networks were and they were the ones that gave them a (controlled) voice. Next to none of them were activists and fewer were leftists, they were well off celebrity virtue signalers just like modern Hollywood.

I'm not going to claim rock is fascist like some of the vacuous idiots here, but it's still true that the hippie movement was controlled opposition operation to neuter the domestic American left and anti-war activism and complete success at doing so. It's also true that the CIA used passifying psychedelics, marijuana, and later crack cocaine to sabotage any anti-establishment movements often in their early stages of formation.

t.stupid boomer
Psyechedelis encourages people to question the system, primarily through starting to feel that theyre enslaved through wageslaving.

so why were hippies fucking worthless? why did the CIA hand it out like candy if it was so dangerous to the system?

I was thinking of Once in a Lifetime tbh.

are you 90 user?

because the USSR was often bad and dumb

I don't entirely agree with this, but my understanding is that rock'n'roll and western pop music were seen as imports which if accepted could be used by western governments to exercise control over the Soviet public. It's a bit like how the internet is banned or highly regulated in present-day Cuba - that's shitty, I wouldn't want to live in such a condition. But at the same time, the US has been trying to destroy them for ages and get them under the American sphere of influence… if I ran one of these nations, I'd be fucking paranoid, too.

Yeah, especially because of Operation Earnest Voice

You do realize that he's fucking right. psychedelics such as LSD were used by the CIA to experiment on people in controlling them. It was called MK-Ultra, some declassified documents already exist on the net.

Okay, they experimented, doesn't mean it was successful in their estimation…. I'm certain lots of govs & orgs have experimented on tonnes of substances to determine properties that would advance their work(s)…

Attached: autism causes vaccines.jpg (500x616, 37.5K)

Stop sperging about rock and roll. Post actual peak proletarian art instead.

Attached: Milan.mp4 (480x250 4.54 MB, 3.03M)

No, it means they didn't tell us what succeeded.

I am nostalgic for past never experienced.

Attached: Руся - Русалонька.mp4 (656x480, 13.28M)

Hi, i'm from /x/, let me explain what happened with MKULTRA
Meanwhile, during the 1960s (which is when MKULTRA largely happened), this is when large-scale anti-drug campaigns began, spreading lies that LSD "fries your brain" and "turns you into a zombified hippy".
Turns out those things aren't true, either.

Attached: mkultra lsd.png (1644x518, 130.12K)

So LSD used as means to invent new US culture coz old culture going to bankrupt?

Soviet morning workout music is unironically and literally the peak of human culture:

/mu/ newfag detected

Attached: Eduard Khil - Pal Take Your Coat.mp4 (320x240, 7.82M)


Nigga please…

Attached: proofs1.png (382x491, 96.22K)