|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
In his latest video commentary, Freedom Center Shillman Fellow and host of “The Right Take” podcast Mark Tapson explains why it’s folly for the Right to underestimate the political influence of the biggest pop star of our time, Taylor Swift — an influencer whom the Democrat Party is fully weaponizing in time for the 2024 presidential election.
Check out the short, essential video below, and follow Mark Tapson at Culture Warrior:
“If one ventures a word with you, will you become impatient?” -Job 4:2
If we are going to “engage young people where they are and guide them out into the light,” we can no longer count upon words and logic. They have little patience with the mental effort required to listen to sound teaching and weigh arguments.
If we are going to be children swayed by the next shiny thing, then we are unfit for self-rule.
May we add the sage advice of Sun-Tzu? “Never underestimate your opponent.”
Billions of dollars and decades of conditioning and millions of hours of agenda-driven programming have been downloaded into the body politic to arrive at this stage, in other wo4ds- mission accomplished,
A phenomenon or a trend?
Taylor Swift gets her ideas from the same places every other American gets their ideas from the philosophers and intellectuals at the universities.
There’s’ no telling what she really believes in or if she has even examined closely the ideas she promotes. She could be just going along to get along. If she wants to remain popular and sell billions of records she promotes the ideas that will not make her a controversial pariah.
Her songs are nothing to write home about. They’re mediocre bubble-bum pop, with a prominent beat and rhythm, with melodic fragments that are never developed into fully developed, flowing melody.
She’s not a cultural threat, she’s just a messenger for the cultural threat.
In any case conservatism lost the culture war back in the 1960s. Just listen to Jimi Hendrix thoroughly smashing, pummeling, and destroying the national anthem at Woodstock.
Although it could be argued that Hendrix was presenting a musical version of the American national anthem the musical equivalent of Picasso’s “Guernica” as a protest against the senseless Vietnam War.
The idea that communism in Vietnam, half a world away, was a threat to America while Kennedy and Johnson allowed communism in Cuba, a mere 90 miles away, is one the many lows of American foreign policy absurdity.
Ah yes, yet another moronic tome about how horrible bubble gum pop is, from the guy who thinks Ayn Rand’s tiddlywink music (happy and light music, like operetta.) is the cat’s meow
Here’s what you actually said during one of your reviews of Hendrix’s National Anthem, (which still gets played some 55 years after he played it at Woodstock):
“Well, the elements of musical rot and decay became unmistakably visible and audible in America in the 1950s with the appearance on the cultural scene of the Eternal Teenager that refuses to ever become a grown-up and the infantilism-decay of his music which is Rock and Roll. From there the decay kept growing until it resulted in such hideous, mangled, rot as Jimi Hendrix’s 1969 rendition of the “Star Spangled Banner” at Woodstock.”
As if you are grown up. It has always been obvious that you hate the unique form of American music almost as much as you hate America, not because you have an understanding of it, but that you are simply an uniformed faux intellectual snob.
After all Rand knew nothing of classical music either. You also described the giants of classical music thusly:
“Beethoven was malevolent and Mozart, Bach, and Handel she (Rand) dismissed as “pre-music”. ”
I always get a laugh when you don’t stay in your small minded lane. I knew you couldn’t keep your mouth shut.
The article is not about VietNam and Jimi Hendrix. But I guess it is impossible for you to ever stick to the point.
Hendrix will always be more popular than your silly Goddess, Ayn Rand
Sadly, it is proven hard to raise a revolution out of The Contented. Unless they can be made to realize their next position is slave or death. Raising a slave revolt is usually much easier, even though it is almost always suicidal. Spartacus? Humans with nothing to lose are dangerous.(Dead humans have no say.)
Ain’t Human Nature grand?
In 2020 George Soros bought the rights to her music and it infuriated her but a couple years later she supported Biden biggest failure of the Republicans is how Soros was working for 60 years to penetrate our culture to corrupt our institutions and we were all asleep he’s one step ahead of us she was a conservative girl once but now she’s part of the $400 million a year club
Soros bought her music 2020. She was not very happy about it. However, two years later, she supported Biden. Anybody worth 400 million dollars a year and above supports Biden
Consider this:
Taylor Swift Swift endorsing “Genocide” Joe might be bring a backlash from the Pro-Palestinian extremists, that could manifest itself in a variety of ways. Why should she put
herself and her career in jeopardy? She has nothing to gain.
What a sad state of affairs. Idolatry now rules the day. We are not that far from being compelled to hang illuminated pictures of our “dear leader” on the dining room wall.
When asked about the Star Spangled Banner on the Dick Cavett show, Hendrix replied that he thought it was “beautiful.”
Sheryle Crow and One Square of TP come to mind
Finally got to hear Hendrix’s rendition after 55 years of hearing ABOUT it. Very interesting.. Thanks, FPM!