kristopaivinen (October 1, 2008 at 11:26 am)

If that was shorthand, then you provided us with few if any hints whatsoever to figure out what the shorthand was for, or that it was shorthand for an unexpected "there is a tendency for"? In absence of more information, I was justified to assume that you used "is" as shorthand to express belonging, like this:If rock and roll is theft of intellectual production, and The Clash is rock and roll, then the Clash is intellectual production.So, what about that form of theft which is justified?

kristopaivinen (September 29, 2008 at 9:53 pm)

There was no "link below".If you meant that people think what happened in Russia represents Marxism, I would not criticize them for it. What happened in Russia represented Marxism better or worse. This is not just a matter of either/or - "represents Marxism or does not represent Marxism". How well or how badly does the Russian revolution represent Marxism, or the ideas of Marx? Wasn't the revolution planned or executed carefully enough?

FartheadOgre (September 29, 2008 at 12:43 pm)

Try Burzum.

spinoza1111 (September 28, 2008 at 1:54 am)

Incredibly poor reading comprehension.By creating a market, rock and roll encourages playuhs to steal intellectual production, as in the case of the theft, without acknowledgement, of Robert Johnson's blues.But this use of "is", as shorthand for "there is a tendency", a necessarily fuzzy "is" of course does not mean that the Clash isn't original or even good. Instead, they are "the exception that proves the rule".

highskilledsibby (September 27, 2008 at 6:55 pm)

It was a hint, not an argument. Most people don't get it and think what in Russia happened was Marxism but it was only a change from one clique to another, not a revolution from the bottom. That, unmistakably, would do the Theories of Marxism to the world when used by the Unselfish.

kristopaivinen (September 25, 2008 at 4:51 pm)

"Marxism is not Stalinism. Don't forget that folks. "Such an argument does not justify Marxism. Don't forget that, either... comrades.

kristopaivinen (September 24, 2008 at 5:59 pm)

"Rock and Roll is theft of intellectual production (not "property")"Such generalizations! So, to constitute Rock and Roll in your worthless definition, some thing must be theft of intellectual production. Therefore, if Sympathy for the Devil and the Clash are not theft of intellectual production, they are not Rock and Roll.

highskilledsibby (September 21, 2008 at 6:37 pm)

Marxism is not Stalinism. Don't forget that folks.

fedeman2 (September 13, 2008 at 10:12 pm)

i get the feeling that his view may be the result of a possible marxist bias, which is a mistake because music cannot be embraced apropraitely from a material or material-oriented stand-point. heidegger would say that you can describe an object from two perspectives. one is by observation and analysis, the other in a "poetic" way (i paraphrase). sticking with the former in the case of music, you fall short.

spinoza1111 (July 22, 2008 at 6:56 am)

Production for use, such as making You Tube videos for the hell of it, or forming a garage band such as the Zeitbugs or We Suck, is DIFFERENT from production for exchange as we see in the Bee Gees or Wang Chung.Ideally all production would be for use, but to live, musicians have to start producing for exchange.Ted Nugent sat next to me in homeroom. He produced music to make money and got his start from a well-off family. So I don't believe most of what he says.