Official Guns N Roses and Axl Twitter & Facebook updates

[Poops Magee]

Yeah. I prefer 80's anarcho-capitalist GN'R to the modern left-wing liberals before us. These guys have become typical coastal elites. What a bore.

[allwaystired]

Yeah. I prefer 80's anarcho-capitalist GN'R to the modern left-wing liberals before us. These guys have become typical coastal elites. What a bore.

'GNR - the great 80's conservatives'.

Yeah, right.

A GNR fan criticizing the band for being 'liberal'. That's a new one! Fucking hilarious!

[Poops Magee]

Can't see where I mentioned conservative... Has this band always been known for their "liberal" stances? To clarify, I'm using liberal in the modern sense of the word and not the Adam Smith understanding. And congrats to the Angie person.

[allwaystired]

Can't see where I mentioned conservative... Has this band always been known for their "liberal" stances? To clarify, I'm using liberal in the modern sense of the word and not the Adam Smith understanding. And congrats to the Angie person.

Sorry- you're saying you dislike their 'liberal' behaviour, and saying you preferred their attitude in he past. I took that to mean conservative. So if they weren't liberal in the past- what were they in your view?
Personally I fail to see how their entire career is anything other than liberal.

Would you prefer it if they were all right-wing these days?

[(t)]

I never saw GNR's career as liberal, or very political at all really. Civil War being the exception.

[allwaystired]

I never saw GNR's career as liberal, or very political at all really. Civil War being the exception.

Lyrically that's true....but their actions and words over their career have always been pretty anti-establishment and anti-authority, so liberal in that sense.

Politically liberal? They probably always have been as individuals, but social media provides us with more of an insight into how band members are feeling now about things......and they all seem very engaged and pissed off with what's happening in their country. Hopefully that anger can be channelled into lyrics and music!

[Poops Magee]

Spot on. Both of you guys just hit the nail on the head. AllwaysTired, your sense of liberal is what I referred to as "classical liberal", so we totally agree there. And that's what gets me. It seems incongruent that they don't say, go after people on the left who want to crack down on free speech, etc. Where are those tweets?

[allwaystired]

Spot on. Both of you guys just hit the nail on the head. AllwaysTired, your sense of liberal is what I referred to as "classical liberal", so we totally agree there. And that's what gets me. It seems incongruent that they don't say, go after people on the left who want to crack down on free speech, etc. Where are those tweets?

That's a bigger debate though- and to be fair to GNR, something they're not going to tackle easily. There is undoubtedly a new breed of people who try to shut down freedom of speech via using liberalism, but in my view they're just very confused, bizaare people, and in the minority (but very vocal).

In my opinion if you're saying 'you can't say that' all the time you're not very liberal at all.

 

[(t)]

Spot on. Both of you guys just hit the nail on the head. AllwaysTired, your sense of liberal is what I referred to as "classical liberal", so we totally agree there. And that's what gets me. It seems incongruent that they don't say, go after people on the left who want to crack down on free speech, etc. Where are those tweets?

Party politics doesn't really encourage free-thinking. No one one wants to rock the boat and be seen as a 'bad liberal' or a 'bad conservative,' or whatever, and be ostracized amongst your peers who you seek approval from.

(not talking about any GNR members here)

[jarmo]

It seems incongruent that they don't say, go after people on the left who want to crack down on free speech, etc. Where are those tweets?

Already been done. They even put their own warning stickers on the albums for those who are offended!  

Ironic that you bring up the people on the left who want to crack down on free speech when it's the leader on the right who's on a crusade against it. Labeling media as "fake news" while not exactly being a poster boy for fact checking himself.

Unless by free speech you mean you want to be able to broadcast to the world how school shootings were staged and so on.....



/jarmo

[Lord Stan]

It seems incongruent that they don't say, go after people on the left who want to crack down on free speech, etc. Where are those tweets?

Already been done. They even put their own warning stickers on the albums for those who are offended!  


/jarmo

I just got my decorative AfD vinyl. The sticker surely is there

[Brundle25]

Hi all, what is Slash's fascination with Sarah Beattie on Twitter, he seems to like every tweet of hers, OR is that Meghan liking on his account?

[Poops Magee]

It seems incongruent that they don't say, go after people on the left who want to crack down on free speech, etc. Where are those tweets?

Already been done. They even put their own warning stickers on the albums for those who are offended!  

Ironic that you bring up the people on the left who want to crack down on free speech when it's the leader on the right who's on a crusade against it. Labeling media as "fake news" while not exactly being a poster boy for fact checking himself.

Unless by free speech you mean you want to be able to broadcast to the world how school shootings were staged and so on.....



/jarmo

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing here, so please excuse my confusion. Are you referring to what the PMRC did with warning labels? That was lead by Tipper Gore. Not exactly a neo-con. It just appears to me that the band went from anti-establishment to anti-Republican, and I find that lame. It's lame for the reason that it's the safe play. For example. Many of us love stand-up comedy. Including our favorite lead singer. Listen to an interview with any comedian worth their salt, and they'll say that stand-up is harder now for good comedians and easier for hacks. You will be ostracized for using "offensive" (gasp!) language, but so long as you bash Trump you're fine. That's not pushing the boundaries. That's the status quo. Not very GN'R if you ask me.

To your other points: It is not ironic that I bring up leftists cracking down on free speech. They are the ones doing it. Trump calling people fake news does not deprive them of the right to broadcast it. The fact that he tells lies also has nothing to do with restricting free speech. In fact, it is a shining example of the concept. Think he's lying? Prove it. Start a dialogue. Right-wing conspiracy theorists also have the right to speak their mind too. Surely, you don't believe that those people should not be allowed to do so?

Thanks for hearing me out. I hope I've been respectful.

[allwaystired]

It seems incongruent that they don't say, go after people on the left who want to crack down on free speech, etc. Where are those tweets?

Already been done. They even put their own warning stickers on the albums for those who are offended!  

Ironic that you bring up the people on the left who want to crack down on free speech when it's the leader on the right who's on a crusade against it. Labeling media as "fake news" while not exactly being a poster boy for fact checking himself.

Unless by free speech you mean you want to be able to broadcast to the world how school shootings were staged and so on.....



/jarmo

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing here, so please excuse my confusion. Are you referring to what the PMRC did with warning labels? That was lead by Tipper Gore. Not exactly a neo-con. It just appears to me that the band went from anti-establishment to anti-Republican, and I find that lame. It's lame for the reason that it's the safe play. For example. Many of us love stand-up comedy. Including our favorite lead singer. Listen to an interview with any comedian worth their salt, and they'll say that stand-up is harder now for good comedians and easier for hacks. You will be ostracized for using "offensive" (gasp!) language, but so long as you bash Trump you're fine. That's not pushing the boundaries. That's the status quo. Not very GN'R if you ask me.

To your other points: It is not ironic that I bring up leftists cracking down on free speech. They are the ones doing it. Trump calling people fake news does not deprive them of the right to broadcast it. The fact that he tells lies also has nothing to do with restricting free speech. In fact, it is a shining example of the concept. Think he's lying? Prove it. Start a dialogue. Right-wing conspiracy theorists also have the right to speak their mind too. Surely, you don't believe that those people should not be allowed to do so?

Thanks for hearing me out. I hope I've been respectful.

Whoooah there!

Donald Trump likes freedom of speech?!

Sure - if he likes what you're saying.

If he doesn't, it's a different story.

"It is frankly disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write.....people should look into that."

Doesn't sound to me like he's too keen on people saying anything whatsoever he doesn't like. Which is probably why he goes beetroot red and flies into a childish rage at every press conference he does where he's asked perfectly reasonable questions.

[jarmo]

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing here, so please excuse my confusion. Are you referring to what the PMRC did with warning labels? That was lead by Tipper Gore. Not exactly a neo-con.

Exactly. And I pointed out the band kinda went against it. Years ago.

It just appears to me that the band went from anti-establishment to anti-Republican, and I find that lame.

Or they've always been both? We just didn't know.

It's lame for the reason that it's the safe play. For example. Many of us love stand-up comedy. Including our favorite lead singer. Listen to an interview with any comedian worth their salt, and they'll say that stand-up is harder now for good comedians and easier for hacks. You will be ostracized for using "offensive" (gasp!) language, but so long as you bash Trump you're fine. That's not pushing the boundaries. That's the status quo. Not very GN'R if you ask me.

I don't think the question is whether or not it's "safe".
If you believe something, you believe something. Obviously some beliefs are dangerous. In this case we're talking about disagreeing with an opinion. Not about killing someone who doesn't share your opinion (as an example of a dangerous belief).
"Oh no. I can't be against what Trump said because it's "safe""? Thinking like that is dangerous.

To your other points: It is not ironic that I bring up leftists cracking down on free speech. They are the ones doing it. Trump calling people fake news does not deprive them of the right to broadcast it. The fact that he tells lies also has nothing to do with restricting free speech. In fact, it is a shining example of the concept. Think he's lying? Prove it. Start a dialogue. Right-wing conspiracy theorists also have the right to speak their mind too. Surely, you don't believe that those people should not be allowed to do so?

Thanks for hearing me out. I hope I've been respectful.

Where do you draw the line?

There's nothing decent about telling parents that their child was killed in a faked school shooting.

Oh, he's been proven to be wrong multiple times. But it's all part of the hate campaign by the "leftist media" don't you know? 




/jarmo

[Poops Magee]

Again, Trump and his administration have not restricted anyone's right to free speech. Him reacting childishly to comments is also not restricting speech. Him saying crazy stuff is an example of freedom of speech and not of restricting it. 

FB, Twitter, and various organizations censoring opinions they deem offensive is restricting speech (although as private companies they can do so). Legislators who want to criminalize certain speech or words they deem offensive would be restricting speech. Thankfully, in the U.S. we haven't had this happen like it has in the U.K. and Canada.

Where do I draw the line? That's the point! Who decides what's decent or not? I agree that those type of comments are despicable, but you're wading into dangerous territory when you start making value judgments and criminalizing speech. And this is coming from the left! Not Republicans, not libertarians, not right-wing nut jobs.

As the law stands, short of directly inciting people to violence or making direct threats, all speech is protected.

And to bring this back around, I would like to refer you to Axl's rant at the Ritz before Out Ta Get Me--"People who tell you what you can say and what you can't say. I personally don't need that!, I don't need that s**** in my life!" God I love this band.

Edit: Apologies, I didn't catch the posts above. 1. Thanks for clarifying the label issue. 2. True, maybe they've been against both for a long time. Republicans have never enjoyed a "cool" phase. Lol.  3. Yes, I agree that someone should not be afraid of espousing a belief simply because it's popular. I think it's kinda obvious that bashing Trump is low hanging fruit, but that's my opinion.

[jarmo]

They have responsibilities to their users. They don't want hate speech on their platforms, for example.

I think it's kinda obvious that bashing Trump is low hanging fruit, but that's my opinion.

A lot of it is self inflicted though. The things he says, the things he says he will do etc. There are actual things to comment on. Not just a conspiracy theory about a birth certificate.....

I'm old enough to remember Bill Clinton. He was considered cool. Something different. And the establishment went after him.

Fast forward to Obama, same thing.

Now we have someone who's constantly saying things that are just empty words. With the support of the party of uncool... 

And to bring this back around, I would like to refer you to Axl's rant at the Ritz before Out Ta Get Me--"People who tell you what you can say and what you can't say. I personally don't need that!, I don't need that s**** in my life!" God I love this band.

Yeah. That was 1988. Different time. Someone telling you you need to wear proper clothes, cut your hair, not use that F word so much etc. I think most here can say we would be agreeing with Axl on that.

Nowadays, free speech means "I wanna post on the Internet and social media about how these people are worth less because of their beliefs or the color of their skin. But you said "People who tell you what you can say and what you can't say"....".

See the difference?






/jarmo

[allwaystired]

Again, Trump and his administration have not restricted anyone's right to free speech. Him reacting childishly to comments is also not restricting speech. Him saying crazy stuff is an example of freedom of speech and not of restricting it. 

FB, Twitter, and various organizations censoring opinions they deem offensive is restricting speech (although as private companies they can do so). Legislators who want to criminalize certain speech or words they deem offensive would be restricting speech. Thankfully, in the U.S. we haven't had this happen like it has in the U.K. and Canada.

Where do I draw the line? That's the point! Who decides what's decent or not? I agree that those type of comments are despicable, but you're wading into dangerous territory when you start making value judgments and criminalizing speech. And this is coming from the left! Not Republicans, not libertarians, not right-wing nut jobs.

As the law stands, short of directly inciting people to violence or making direct threats, all speech is protected.

And to bring this back around, I would like to refer you to Axl's rant at the Ritz before Out Ta Get Me--"People who tell you what you can say and what you can't say. I personally don't need that!, I don't need that s**** in my life!" God I love this band.

Edit: Apologies, I didn't catch the posts above. 1. Thanks for clarifying the label issue. 2. True, maybe they've been against both for a long time. Republicans have never enjoyed a "cool" phase. Lol.  3. Yes, I agree that someone should not be afraid of espousing a belief simply because it's popular. I think it's kinda obvious that bashing Trump is low hanging fruit, but that's my opinion.

"Legislators who want to criminalize certain speech or words they deem offensive would be restricting speech. Thankfully, in the U.S. we haven't had this happen like it has in the U.K. and Canada. "

I'd love to know how this has happened in the UK. It's news to me.

[pilferk]

FYI: I had a couple posts here...which I deleted. So no conspiracy theories.

I'm going to consciously keep my political discussion over in The Jungle.

You guys can have at it!

[jarmo]

Yes, makes sense....





/jarmo