Talk:Anti-Flag

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anti-Flag is part of WikiProject Pittsburgh, which is building a comprehensive guide to the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania metropolitan area and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, you can edit the attached article, join, or discuss the project.Editors are currently needed to tag Pittsburgh-related articles with {{pghproj}}.
Wikiproject_Punk This article is part of WikiProject Punk music, an attempt to improve articles related to Punk rock. Please participate by visiting the project page for more details on the projects.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ]
(If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Anti-Flag article.

Contents

[edit] Merchandising and socialism

Perhaps the largest criticism of Anti-Flag is that while they claim to have far left-wing ideals, perhaps akin to socialism, they are happy to sell their merchandise and records at a price. It's a tad hypocritical, when they've aimed songs at money greedy corperations previously, yet they have no qualms with making money themselves.

Anti-Flag is the only major-label band I know that sells its albums and T-shirts for $10 at their concerts. This contrasts strongly with the prices at most concerts, where sleazy merchandisers charge more, knowing that fans will be so excited about the concert that they'll pay inflated prices. Sylvar 17:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] critique

'In 2005 Anti-Flag announced that their new album will be released early 2006 under RCA Records. The band said that they want their music to be heard. RCA is owned by Sony BMG, one of the largest corporations in the world. Many fans find this decision hypocritical due to Anti-Flag's previously overt anti-capitalist lyrics.'

Yes while it can be said that Anti-flag signing to this lable is hypocritical, some punk bands like The Sex Pistols argue that they are not afraid to break into the mainstream ie; appearing on Top of the Pops, signing to a major lable, because it is the best way to get their ideas into the mainstream, which considering that punk is a potential pollitical idealolgy is important within pollitics and gaining movement for the punk scene.--Snowy Mcintosh 20:28, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

That (among other things) is why the sex pistols are an aweful band. I don't think the sex pistols had any kind of ideology beyond reactionary nihilism. The fact of the matter is, anti-flag has not only signed on to mainstream labels but also toned down their lyrics and music over the years to more mainstream levels. They went from "kill the rich" to "power to the peaceful". They went from "...and they still had the nerve to ask who I was voting for" to supporting punkvoter. Their old stuff was good, but over the years they clearly sold out.
If you want to spread an idea, do it by engaging the general public in a decentralized manner, don't think a few catchy slogans played on the radio will make a huge difference.The Ungovernable Force 01:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
They've always been political infants, and the fact they even sell CDs (as opposed to giving them away) is hypocrisy. Signing to a major record label is ridiculous in terms of their supposed beliefs. GreatGatsby 19:34, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Well, if you have enough money to obtain, make and then give away cd's without starving to death, then yes. I don't think there is anything wrong with selling cd's, but it should by DIY and no more than a few bucks a pop to cover expenses. Profiting off of revolutionary ideas is clearly selling out. I guess the best way to do revolutionary cd distro would be to shoplift tons of blank cd's for burning, but that is kinda risky. The Ungovernable Force 04:26, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Hardly hypocritical. You can work within the capitalist system while attacking it.
True. Look at Chumbawamba. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 09:14, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] biased

This article needs to be changed to a non biased pov. It seems the author has just put his opinions down in place of an actual article.

  • care to elaborate? Fightindaman 06:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


The last paragraph is clearly biased. It states "Many fans find this decision hypocritical" was there a survey, is there anything that can back that statement up? It sounds like some pretentious fan boy is upset that his favourite band signed to a major lable. So i am removing the "many fans...." statement, as there is no evidence to back that up. Jacknife737 19:46, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Anti-Flag's announcment of their deal with RCA includes the statement that "shit talkers will talk shit." Obviously they'd been getting flak for the decision (since rumors had been circulating around the net for some time). You are correct in saying that "many" is hard to back up, but "some" is not. Fightindaman 01:13, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Relax

Every now and again, people from all walks of life decide that what they are doing has been fruitless to that point and seek to change how they go about their business.

I.E. trying to promote change WORLDWIDE while being on an independent label. Anti-Flag made a calculated gamble to take on people who are going to accuse them of being sellouts in order to reach a larger audience. I'm sure in their minds, having a couple of hardcore fans who already get the message pissed off at them is a small price to pay for getting their point of view and information to the masses. For every "true fan" that is going to be choked by them being on RCA, they may create 100 new fans who all of the sudden realize what a travesty the government of the USA is.

That's my opinion anyway.

[edit] World Can't Wait

I removed this because I don't really feel that it's worth our time to post every piece of activism that the band's involved with in the article. The person who added this, by looking at their contribs, clearly has an agenda, and since this hasn't been a particular major thing for the band I don't really see any reason to include it. Also, external links should pertain directly to the subject of the article. Fightindaman 20:03, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Left Wing

  • In what world are the politics of this band "left wing". They are at the most extreme liberal centrist with attempts at shocking lyrics.Tombride 06:49, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Care to explain? Because songs like "Kill the Rich" "We Want an Anarchy" "Free Nation?" "Police State In the USA" don't really sound like centrist views to me. I wish some of them would be, but they aren't. Also, they have claimed to be socialists in the past, and I think that immediately excludes them form the general "Liberal" label. 70.181.139.64 04:39, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I say left-wing. They are fairly reformist though. Maybe use progressive/left-wing as a compromise. And I agree with the idea that they are out for shock value, but I don't think they can be seen as liberal, at least not their old stuff. Old anti-flag was pretty good, now it's just lame. The Ungovernable Force 02:23, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

"Progressive/left-wing" would be fine by me. 70.181.139.64 04:39, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Like I said before. Their politics are liberal with random attempts to appear dangerous or radical through sloganeering in a effort to project an image that sells records to their fan base of pre-teens. They've also advocated burning down librarys. So, unless you think that's part of their left wing beliefs...Tombride 17:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree with the sentiment that they are just trying to sell an image, and if you can source that criticism you could (and I would fully support you on this) make the criticism in the article. But it should say that they at least try to seem left-wing/progressive/socialist/whatever we agree on. The Ungovernable Force 22:56, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

When did they advocate burning down libraries? Also, they have referred to themselves as socialists before. I think its just easier to say left-wing rather than try and categorize them. Especially since most of their fans wont agree with you.

P.S. Sorry about reverting your changes without disscussing first. My bad. 70.181.139.64 22:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Oh, and I found this on their website

"Question: what is anti-flag's political affiliation?

Answer: The members of Anti-Flag tend to prescribe to progressive, far left leaning political ideology. Anti-Flag have backed a number of political candidates in the past but overall tend not to back specific candidates. " http://www.anti-flag.com/GO50.php?offset=15

So that seems to be their offical word on it. 70.181.139.64 22:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Alright. For lack of a better source from me that's going to be how it stays then.Tombride 23:04, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
"Progressive" and "far-left" are two totally different things. Progressive is universally applied to liberals (left-of-center), not people on the radical end of the spectrum. It's like someone trying to say we "prescribe to conservative, fascistic political ideology" in order to make their ideas seem less crazy. GreatGatsby 19:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] why a wing?

in my oponion you are wrong gatsby. SEE POST ABOVE "LEFT WING". i think that AF is trying stop the "left wing" "rightwing" way of thinking. the seem to support more radical ideas but acctuly their retoric sounds a liltle like communism.

Razor romance

[edit] criticism

Should it be noted that there is alot of criticism within the punk scene that Anti-Flag doesn't know what they ar talking about, and that most of there lyrics are just meant to be shocking, or just ramble on about how the government is run by "facists"?

What the fuck are you talking about?

whoever wrote that statment has two problems with that statment

1 it is not the porpouse of wikipedia to determin if a band "knows what they are talking about" and 2SIGN YOUR FRIGGIN WORK!!! Razor romance 18:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Baseless critisisms

"Perhaps the largest criticism of Anti-Flag is that while they claim to have far left-wing ideals, perhaps akin to socialism, they are happy to sell their merchandise and records at a price. They've aimed songs at money greedy corporations previously, yet they have no qualms with making money themselves."

I deleted this because Anti-Flag have never stated that people should not be able to profit from their work.

[edit] Singles

There should be a singles section

[edit] lebo

haha, if you think mt lebo is affluent... oh boy. upper middle class, sure, but affluent? ha.

[edit] Albums

Someone should put together a Albums section. There's quiet a few.

[edit] Sellouts?

I don't really own for blood and empire, so I can't say whether or not they sold out with it. But I do know that The Terror State is a shining example of what a deftly political punk album should be. It cites problems in the world, gives evidence to support these problems, presents the message in an angry yet intelligient manner, manages to have catchy lyrics without being wishy washy, and gives us a little direction as to what to do about the world. It is one of the best punk albums I've picked up in a while and has some of the best lyrics I've ever seen, from any genre of music.

Whoever says anti-flag watered down their lyrics by going from "kill the rich" to "power to the peaceful" is a moron. Either you haven't actually heard the song or you are just a war mongering rebel without a clue. What's wrong with a little pacifism? Must all punks be violent rebels? Can't we have some punks that believe in a little peace and unity?

I also see little problem with switching to a major label or making money off the cds. A poor person can do little to change the world, especially if he is starving. Look at Black Flag for crisakes. They were highly DIY and they practically starved to death their entire careers! On the other hand, signing to a major label allows you to broadcast your views to a wider audience. You can call it hypocritical that they denounce capitalism and then take part in the system, or you can call it ironic that they are seeking the collapse of the system that has latched on to them. To destroy your enemy, get close to him right? As for making money off their junk, even highly DIY bands like Against All Authority and Black Flag charge circa 10 bucks per cd. It's impossible to cover cost of manufacture and feed yourself if you charge less than that! It's not like they live in mansions or drive corvettes or anything! It is especially hard to hand out cds for free or charge small amounts of money if you are trying to circulate your material among a wide audience like Anti-Flag is.

Also, let's be fair. Anti-Flag is anti-corporate, but corporations are a lot larger than a group of musicians making money of their music. Anti-Flag's money is money earned for a job well done, not money stolen, like the giant corporations tend to do, which is what anti-flag speaks out against. Learn the difference between earning and stealing. It's crutial. 208.191.84.241 20:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)Punk rock extraordinaire

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/n/t/Talk%7EAnti-Flag_b788.html"