As Antonio Gramsci argued, ruling groups maintain power partly by making their ideas seem like common sense. This helps explain the political significance of Metallica’s call for disengagement at a time when Israel’s genocide in Palestine demands urgent international attention. Hetfield’s vague agenda of “love, energy and heavy music” ultimately amounts to a refusal to stand for anything meaningful. And that refusal is itself deeply political.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

For sure. I don't think that the conversation has to take place in every setting though. Like I don't bring up Palestine in every conversation I have. If someone else brings it up, they get to hear my thoughts. If Metallica didn't want to be associated with the topic, don't bring it up politics at all. I don't agree with Sheeran's response at all, but I do have some level some sympathy that he was forced into the conversation, but that's it. If he were a better person, he could have garnered insane amounts of support, but he's not, so he didn't. Hell, he could have even shielded himself to some extent by just saying that he disagrees with the actions taken against Macklemore and left it at that, even if he carries shitty views. He doubled fucked up by not supporting his friend and by siding with Israel.

[–] rumimevlevi@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago

In case of Ed, he said to Mac privately that free Palestine hurt genocidal people feeling. That the disgusting thing about Ed. He didn't have to say that