The Dixie Chicks

by Stan Conroy 110 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  Sara Annie

  People shouldn't be judged on their views, but on their work.

  Ah, so noble and yet so wrong.

  You're confusing inherent respect for someone's art with the refusal to financially support it due to political views that differ from your own. You can appreciate Polanski's movies as well crafted, and still not want to line the pocket of a child molester. I can really like Diet Coke, but not drink it because the company supported Apartheid. In the same way, I think that most people who decided not to continue to purchase Dixie Chick merchandise don't suddenly think that the music they produce sucks. They simply decided that, in light of a statement that they found offensive, they would no longer shell out their dollars to the person who said it. That's capitalism, baby. I can buy, or not buy, what you've got to sell for any reason I want. I think the fact that you don't find this particular reason to have great merit is the reason you're reacting so badly. I happen to agree with you. I think that she made a rash, ill-thought out statement that came back and bit her in the ass, or more painfully, in the pocketbook. But if someone wishes not to support her for her political views, I'm totally cool with that.

  The bottom line is that people can decide whether they want to line the pockets of someone who they have a fundamental difference of opinion with about issues they deem important. What is at issue here is that ideology does matter when people are spending their hard-earned cash to buy your 'work'.
• 

  ashitaka

  You can appreciate Polanski's movies as well crafted, and still not want to line the pocket of a child molester. I can really like Diet Coke, but not drink it because the company supported Apartheid.

  You see, I do both of these things. I firmly believe in the separation of work/art and the person. The drink/food/experience is for me, not for the person. If they make cash off of something I like to buy, oh well. I'm no sentimental politician. Just a guy who sees a can of coke as a can of coke, not a political statement.

  ash
• 

  Stan Conroy

  Interesting viewpoints from everyone. My only point of contention:

  "But trying to claim others have no RIGHT to boycott well-known people for their anti-war, anti-govt, anti-president views makes absolutely no sense."

  I don't think that is what I said. People can spend their money on whatever they want, or withhold it. They DO have that right. But if making a comment, voicing your opinion, expressing your "Freedom of Speech" results in organized CD burnings and threats of violence, I think there are issues here a lot deeper then a person's rights. Do you have the right to vandalize a person's home because you disagree with them? Do you have a right to send death threats?

  Stan
• 

  xenawarrior

  People shouldn't be judged on their views, but on their work.

  Then they shouldn't mix the two. They took the opportunity to express their "views" to thousands of people- a captive audience. If they didn't want the consequences of that they should have kept it about their work.

  I don't go to a concert to hear the political views of the group members I'm there to see- whether I would agree with them or not. I'm there to see them and hear their music. I don't want anyone's political views forced on me because I'm sitting in a seat I paid for in a quest to be entertained. That wasn't what I chose.

  My opinion

  XW
• 

  SixofNine

  I can really like Diet Coke, but not drink it because the company supported Apartheid.

  No no hun, that's aspartame.

  Six-smart ass class
• 

  crownboy

  Well, I agree with the posters who say that persons have the right to boycott the Dixie chicks' music. They (the dixie chicks) should have realized that their comments would register negatively with their fan base.

  Of course, I find the boycotters actions entirely sophomoric and intolerant, but we are talking about conservatives here . For me personally, I wouldn't boycott somebody simply for being pro/anti war. I'm still going to watch Yankees games pitched by Roger Clemens despite his (nauseatinely) pro war stance, because I respect his right to have that opinion. However, I'm 100% sure that had his comments been as strong in the anti war stance, there would be certain intolerant factions in the pro war camp who would seek to boycott him or otherwise harm him for having that opinion. However, in the end, I defend the right of dixie chick boycotters to act in their sillyness. xenawarrior, are you equally as mad at Roger Clemens for using his popularity as a celebrity to "force" his pro war views on the public?

  As a total aside, hasn't the sale of Dixie Chicks records continued to be quite good despite the hysteronics of the boycotters?

  (Edited to add: I have never bought any Dixie Chicks music and probably won't anytime soon. )
• 

  Nomad Soul

  YES, THE DIXIE CHICKS HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

  AMERICANS HAVE THE FREEDOM OF BOYCOTTING, :) .
• 

  xenawarrior

  edited due to a double posting -DEMONZ
• 

  xenawarrior

  xenawarrior, are you equally as mad at Roger Clemens for using his popularity as a celebrity to "force" his pro war views on the public?

  Yep !!

  I'm not mad though or even angry. I just think that it's taking unfair advantage regardless who does it- pro anything/anti-anything. I came to hear the music, see the game - whatever- I didn't make the choice to be subjected to anyone's political views in that venue whether I would agree with them in some other time or place.

  BTW- who is Roger Clemens?

  just kidding

  XW
• 

  peacefulpete

  Her comment was pointed and legitamate. Her timing was dead on, she exposed the extremist element in America thru their slanderous reaction to her. She was targeted by the far right media and wesites. Her music was not boycotted by people it was boycotted by the right wing media moguls. Very real pressure and threats were issued to all affiliated radio stations to not play their music. She was called a "pinko" and "terrorist loving communist" by the political force that has sponsored and organized this well funded smear campaign. This response was not a simple matter of some people disagreeing with her remarks it was an attempt to make an example out of her to squash public dissent about Bush's policies and war. We have entered dark days in America. Her "recanting" in fact was nothing of the sort. She spoke of her being a mother and concerned about children first and how this motivated her comment. She did say that while very commonly done, it would have been better to have limited her public opinions to specific issues and concerns about the present presidency rather than resorting to personally disparaging remarks about the man in the office. If anyone can manage to meet this ideal I have not met them. Yet even in this intellegent and respectful self correction she proved to be a true American worthy of immitation. Blind allegiance to a misdirected government is not patriotism. It is dangerous mob think.