All That Remains’ Phil Labonte: “The Music Industry, In General, Is A PC Mouthpiece For The DNC”
Phil Labonte of All That Remains is not one to shy from expressing his beliefs. Labonte, a staunch libertarian, recently had a brief rant on his Facebook regarding the state of music industry today.
Here’s what he had to say about that:
“The music industry, in general, is a PC mouthpiece for the DNC [Democratic National Committee] just like most major media outlets. So much for “expression”. Today that means ‘express what is politically correct’”
COMMENTS
If the masses only knew what Libertarianism is all about, this country would be in an infinitely greater shape.
What is it all about, oh wise one? Tell me the secrets.
ron paul fails and everyone jumps ship to gary johnson. yea…that’s exactly what we need. a bunch of idiots with no convictions. i honestly can’t stand third-party voters/libertards more than republicans. they’re worse because they actually think they’re different, they know something no one else does (like voting for a candidate that will never win in a winner-takes-all election system), and most importantly…..they purposefully vote third-party (or not at all) just so they can CONSTANTLY BITCH HOW THINGS ARE. i actually think that is the MAIN reason anyone chooses to be independent. it’s a way of blowing smoke up your own ass, and justifying your incessant whining. shut the fuck up and play the game. the only party that ever has a chance to get elected and somewhat cares about any of your rights is the one in office.
Both parties have trampled over our rights. FWIW, I’ve never voted Libertarian outside of local elections because of the reason you just mentioned — no chance of them winning.
Libertarianism is not a valid ideology. It’s equally as dangerous as communism, just at the opposite end of the spectrum. It looks great on paper, but it doesn’t work in the real world. Libertarians believe in this fantasy that an unrestricted market is the only path to liberty and that government interference can only lead to tyranny. They refuse to acknowledge that there are serious flaws within capitalism and that these flaws can only be corrected with government regulation.
If you need any historical evidence that demonstrates the failure of an unregulated economy, look no further than US history following the Civil War and up to around the time of the FDR administration.
What we truly need is a proper balance between business and government, a combination of public cuts and tax increases, a much smaller military presence and a Congress that doesn’t waste everyone’s time with partisan pissing matches. Putting our livelihoods in the hands of a fringe political party won’t accomplish a damn thing.
I’m sorry Blue, but I can’t help but think of Patrick Bateman (American Psycho) when reading your last paragraph. Not to take away from anything you said, however. Your education in politics far exceeds my own.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=vCicqORi8Mc#t=132s
Hahahaha! Damn it I did sound sound like him. I’m not worried though. I’m poor as shit and I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t enjoy raping or killing, so that monologue is where our similarities end.
It’s been proven time and again that raising taxes doesn’t increase federal revenue and is more apt to decrease it. Why would you raise them? And no, I’m far, far, far away from a 1%er.
I realize that perhaps this isn’t the best venue for this discussion since it’s a bit difficult to keep track of, but I am curious your reasoning on that point. I agree with you about cutting spending, but might disagree on the degree of the cuts.
Raising taxes decreases revenue? Is that kind of like how more guns prevents gun crime? It just isn’t true. I’m much more into science than economics but I have taken some micro and macro I have never seen a piece of academic literature that echoes your claim. The Laffer Curve is what you’re referring to and it’s not accepted as fact by any reputable economist I’ve ever read. If it was true, the Bush cuts would have payed for themselves by now.
We currently have some of the lowest effective tax rates in the developed world. If you look back in history to our most productive years as a nation, we had much higher effective tax rates, more regulation and less income inequality. This whole debt crisis began with a huge increase in spending (wars) and a decrease in taxes for those who can best afford to contribute. We are experiencing a time where corporate profits are at 45 year high and taxes are at a 30 year low, yet unemployment remains high and working wages have been stagnant for decades.
I had a huge reply typed out yesterday, though probably quite scattered in content since I was typing it up at work off and on. So I’ll just summarize, briefly. Since it appears as if I was wrong in my assertion — but it also appears you are as well?
Perhaps the Republican talking point of tax rates vs. tax revenue that I was saying isn’t true, but the liberal argument that you’re putting forth isn’t necessarily true either. The correlation between rates and revenue as a percent of GDP has averaged around 18-20% no matter how high the tax rates are. That’s the real figure we’re curious in, right?
And in response to your gun analogy, since I just couldn’t let that shit go… Getting rid of guns certainly doesn’t cease crimes committed with guns. Criminals will get their hands on them one way or another.
Your claim about taxation equaling 18-20% regardless of the tax rate may be accurate. I’d have to dig into it deeper because I’m not sure, but it doesn’t seem like that conclusion could be reached without cherry-picking data. It’s possible that whatever you’ve read may have only used nominal tax rates rather than effective rates. You can jack up the nominal rate but open loopholes and add subsidies that would lead to decreasing revenue, even with the higher rates.
And as far as guns, you’re right. You can outlaw guns and criminals will find ways to get their hand on them. That doesn’t mean that there isn’t a solution that makes it more difficult to do so. And that’s my biggest problem with the right side of the political spectrum these days. If a system isn’t working or not working as efficiently as it should, the conservatives and libertarians offer one solution, cut funding and eliminate. Everything is black and white. Frankly, I think it’s lazy. I won’t vote for anyone who refuses to acknowledge a problem exists simply because they don’t have a solution to offer or have one and just don’t want to fund it.
Every word he wrote is inaccurate. I’d love to stick around and pick apart his comment, but this baby killing liberal is off to work.
Individual liberty. Self-reliance. Minimal government interference.
Is he still bitching about when everyone went off on him for saying “faggot”? Sounds to me that’s what “express what is politically correct” is getting at.
I think Natalie Maine would beg to differ. Turns out, people don’t really want to know your political position when they paid to hear music. Wrong again Phil.
Only unless that political position is contained within the lyrics! See years 2003-2008 in music for reference.
That’s true: if they put their opinion to a good tune I will listen to it.
You’re no Jesus, yeah you’re no fuckin’ Elvis!
Oh well, he’ll always just be “The Guy Who Used To Be the Singer For Shadows Fall”.
i wonder how he typed this with all the chick-fil-a waffle fries in his hands…
He needs to check out a For Today concert.
We get it dude. You voted for Bush. That’s nothing to be proud of. Now go back to playing your butt-rock under the guise of a third-tier metalcore band.
Just now as I was putting on a metal record, I thought to myself, “Goddamn, I need to hear some fuckin’ political opinions STAT.”
bi-partisan politics: like a dick in your ass without a kiss goodnight
Phil called me a socialist one day on twitter (back when I cared about his band to follow him still.) What a tea-bagger.
…isn’t this cat from the same state as Vincent Bennett from The Acacia Strain? I wouldn’t call TAS ‘PS’..
“PC”…fuck.
« Back View All Recent Comments »