School of Punk: Late Capitalism’s Infliction on Punk Music
Elvis Takahashi Mantello / May 12 2021
(7 min read)
We live in unprecedented times. Our lives are held in check by a virus that keeps us locked in our homes and the concert halls empty. It is during this time that I reminisce about the joys of live punk music and the catharsis of the mosh pits. My first year at BISLA has exposed me to diverse political philosophies and in turn, made me think about deeper social and political implications of the intersubjective relationship between music and society. More specifically, how politics and political philosophies shape popular music or how punk music was shaped by late capitalism, otherwise known as neoliberalism.
In this ultimately weird first year of university life, I have been inspired by two great works of political philosophy. The first is Max Stirner’s philosophy from The Ego and Its Own (or in a proper translation from the original, The Unique and Its Property) which discusses egoism and the abnormality of conformal societies. Second, is Mark Fisher’s Capitalist Realism which discusses the idea that there is no alternative discourse to capitalism. These two books share common affinities, especially, their harsh criticism of capitalism. Reflecting on these books, this short essay investigates the exploitation and eventual commercialization of punk through late capitalism.
The essence of punk music is not that difficult to understand. To begin with, in our ever-conservative, materialistic, and woke world, punk’s reputation has gone from bad to worse. Unsurprisingly, the Oxford dictionary defines punk music as “a type of loud and aggressive rock music popular in the late 1970s and early 1980s”. But what type of rock is not aggressive or loud? Curiously enough, the crowdsourced dictionary.com notes that punk rock is “a type of rock-'n'-roll, reaching its peak in the late 1970s and characterized by loud, insistent music and abusive or violent protest lyrics, and whose performers and followers are distinguished by extremes of dress and socially defiant behavior”. However, the main motivation of the genre (at least for the first wave of punk) was to criticize the problems in our society.
By the early ’70s, the punk movement was considered more political due to its statements. For example, they sang about unemployment, inequality, and institutionalized poverty that came during the 70s economic depression, defunding of public welfare, and the rise of neoliberalism in England. These conditions became the inspirational fodder of bands such as the Sex Pistols and the Clash (Moran, 2010). Other punk bands from the US like the Ramones or the Dead Kennedys had also become notable for their critique of neoliberalism. Similar to the Brits, the Americans were frustrated by the system and sang about the political distresses that fuelled them with rage.
The punk scene can be viewed just as much as a catharsis as it was a subversive counter-cultural movement. Moreover, their songs mirrored the angst of the disenfranchised facing unemployment and austerity. For example, political hardliners such as Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher were infamous for their cuts to public services and social welfare programs. Punk music became an anthem targeting the harsh effects of neoliberalism such as income inequalities, racism, and a lack of social safety net. By the ’90s, many of the female punk bands also rose to popularity. These songs were not simply sonic artillery against the establishment but importantly, they represented a collective movement known as Riot Grrrl which advocated a need for greater social awareness of feminism. Moreover, other female punk bands such as Bikini Kill and Bratmobile focused on politics but through a feminist lens. Their explosive lyrics spoke about topics such as rape, domestic violence, and patriarchy. Early punk rock shocked the establishment and the commercial music industry.
Interestingly, Max Stirner is considered by many as the Godfather of anarchist thought. Perhaps if Stirner had lived long enough to see the emergence of Sex Pistols, he would have joined their band. As Newman (2017) contends, Stirner would have considered individual freedom under neoliberalism as a “kind of trap – a logic that reduces the individual to an infinite conformability with the norms of society” (p. 5). In Max Stirner’s book The Ego and Its Own (1907/2019), the post-Hegelian German philosopher argues that with ownness, one must come to manifest themselves without any outside precursors. He believes that anything outside an individual's material day-to-day reality, such as the law or religion are artificial and abstract concepts. He calls such things “spook”. Furthermore, Stirner emphasizes that an individual must disobey the “spooks” to discover their unique self. In essence, Stirner’s egoism reflects the spirit of punk music. As a genre drenched in aversion to the airbrushed aesthetic of 80s consumer culture, punk defined itself through an aggressive zero-tolerance with materialism and superficiality. This created its political discourse as a musical subgenre through anarchy – a defiant middle finger to the political and music establishment. Hence, Stirner’s philosophy on egoism and its nihilistic inclinations bears a strong affinity to the anarchist spirit of punk music.
However, while the punk scene was recognized as an avant-garde accomplishment (Henry, 1984), the conformity bred by consumer capitalism eventually managed to co-opt the authenticity of punk. The problem is clearly illustrated in Mark Fischer’s book Capitalist Realism (2009), and his writings on Kurt Cobain. Fischer contends that Cobain succumbed to what he feared and hated most, being a cliché idol of the music industry. Fischer goes on to note that Cobain’s creativity was eventually crippled because he saw himself as merely another rock star cliché. Fischer writes,
“The impasse that paralyzed Cobain is precisely the one that Jameson described: like postmodern culture in general, Cobain found himself in ‘a world in which stylistic innovation is no longer possible, [where] all that is left to imitate dead styles, to speak through the masks and with the voices of the styles in the imaginary museum” (p. 13).
Moreover, Kurt Cobain faces a constant impasse of being commodified through all of his predicted actions. For example, Cobain’s spontaneous yet failed attempt to play “Rape Me” on his MTV live gig instead of the originally agreed-upon song, “Lithium”, signaled his discontent. In this sense, punk was seen as a flirtatious way to attract customers in the means of commodification. Like many rock stars in history, Cobain’s rebellious persona eventually became a consumable product. In the end, Cobain’s failure to resist the pressures of the mainstream mirrors the greater failure of the punk music genre in late capitalism. It reinforces the idea, that innovative works of art are simply imitations or copies of previous works of art.
As Fischer argues, in a neoliberal society, an individual’s feelings or ambitions are molded by capitalist ideology. Fischer’s argument is reinforced by the notion of classic punk’s antagonistic discourse towards neoliberalism and its eventual failure. The motivation of classic punk was a challenge or critique of neoliberalism. Classic punk’s authenticity was its dislike (if not outright disgust) with 80s consumerism and materialism. The D.I.Y. (Do It Yourself) aspect of punk culture in which musicians self-recorded their music, redefined ‘musicianship’, created their own unique fashion - ripped jeans, torn shirts, and the Mohawk hairstyle, embodied punk music’s spirit of anarchy. Yet in the end, the forces of late capitalism stripped punk music of its authenticity. As with most art trends, classic punk fashion was eventually co-opted by the mainstream and is now sold in department stores under designer labels as ‘streetwear’. The commodification of punk is also personified in billboard advertisements of limited ‘Sex Pistol’ Doc Marten boots. Thus, classic punk spirit, initially defined itself by its opposition to consumerism was eventually absorbed into neoliberalism. It became what it detested most, it became a product of capital, a superficial logo that rather than symbolizing rebellion communicated conformity under late capitalism.
So if artistic innovation such as punk eventually becomes a form of capital appropriation, then perhaps Mark Fischer is correct in saying that there are no alternatives to capitalism in a society that is ingrained with capitalist ideology. Then, as Fischer claims, it is probably easier to imagine an end to the world than an end to capitalism.
References
Fischer, M. (2009). Capitalist Realism. Zero Books.
Henry, T. (1984). Punk and Avant-Grade Art. Journal of Popular Culture, 17(4), 30.
Moran, I. P. (2010). Punk: The do-it-yourself subculture. Social Sciences Journal, 10(1), 13.
Newman, S. (2019). ‘Ownness created a new freedom’: Max Stirner’s alternative concept of liberty. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 22(2), 155-175.
Stirner, M. (2019). The Ego and Its Own. Anodos Books. (Original work published 1907).
