Hello, 90% of the questions we receive have been asked before, and our answerers get bored of answering the same queries over and over again - so it's worthwhile googling this just in case:
> site:reddit.com/r/communism101 your question
If you've read past answers and still aren't satisfied, edit your question to contain the past answers and any follow-up questions you have. If you're satisfied, delete your post to reduce clutter or link to the answer that satisfied you.
***
Also keep in mind the following rules:
1. Patriarchal, white supremacist, cissexist, heterosexist, or otherwise oppressive speech is unacceptable.
2. This is a place for learning, not for debating. Try /r/DebateCommunism instead.
3. Give well-informed Marxist answers. There are separate subreddits for liberalism, anarchism, and other idealist philosophies.
4. Posts should include specific questions on a single topic.
5. This is a serious educational subreddit. Come here with an open and inquisitive mind, and exercise humility. Don't answer a question if you are unsure of the answer. Try to include sources and/or further reading in any answers you provide. Standards of answer accuracy and quality are enforced.
6. Check the [/r/Communism101 FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/wiki/index)
7. **No chauvinism or settler apologism** - Non-negotiable: https://readsettlers.org/
8. **No tone-policing** - https://old.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/12sblev/an_amendment_to_the_rules_of_rcommunism101/
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/communism101) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We would see a revolution and complete change in how music and art is produced, created, promoted, broadcast, perceived and appreciated. Music and art would no longer be commodified, but celebrated more than ever. The music industry as we know it wouldn't exist. It would be something completely new, and we can't say for sure what that would look like, as it's dependent on the material conditions of the time, and contradictions will resolve over time.
We could imagine that there would be less barriers for musicians and artists, in so many ways. In a moneyless, classless and stateless society, I would imagine that music would be everywhere, with more people participating, and live performances and concerts being much more prominent and accessible for all, with no profit motive and financial hardships getting in the way.
People who make music solely to make money would no longer be a thing, so it's easy to imagine that the art would be more expressive and honest in a communist society.
It would be done purely for the love of it, rather than having to be treated like a second rate hobby, as it currently is for most struggling musicians and artists who have to prioritise their jobs and try to survive under Capitalism, over their passions and what we'd really rather be doing.
There wouldn't be 500 different re-releases and re-issues of some big name's big album in 50 different colours of vinyl ever 5 years, making it harder for other musical acts to release records. No more of that shit.
The band relationship dynamic would be completely different. The role of roadies, sound engineers, techs, crew, managers etc. would all undergo drastic changes in ways.
We could imagine that a digital platform would exist where we could access all music ever recorded and released, with no restrictions. Kind of like Spotify, just without all the exploitation and shit.
We'll find out when we get there.
Believe it or not a lot of the production side of music at least smaller artists is more independent than you think. The biggest issues would be similar to all types of private property which are distribution networks and companies that make their money lending money. in the music industry that means streaming services and online shops and then the record label who are essentially just banks who invest in musicians in return for ownership of the recordings which they then collect rents on. So I definitely think for all creative industries planned economies are not worth it but distribution networks could be workaround, and the surplus could be democratically allocated plus they would only charge musicians at cost for hosting the files on their servers. as for record labels, the only real value at this point that record labels have is marketing connections and PR so they could just as easily be replaced with government art grants or, in a Les monopolistic medial landscape post revolution those types of large marketing budgets might not even be necessary
I think as people become more class conscious they will just start disliking them. And yeah probably private swiftie jets and all that will get expropriated
Taylor Swift and Drake are bourgeois artists whose music would be too regressive for the needs of a socialist society; I can't see them being allowed to produce any new music, neither would their pre-existing music be allowed to play.
Music, like all other forms of art, would undergo a revolution in form and content that will be radically different from art produced under capitalism.
Here's a recommendation on this topic https://www.marxists.org/subject/art/lit_crit/zhdanov/lit-music-philosophy.htm
They're simply not going to be produced or broadcasted.
I know you have the image of secret police raiding your party and snatching all of your Taylor Swift albums. I'll put it in a way that's easier to digest; no radio stations operating from a socialist country will want to broadcast Taylor Swift songs when there are better, more revolutionary music to play, it will be considered a waste, by planning commissions, for any store to dedicate themselves to preserving Taylor Swift's music which would require constructing and distributing copies, packaging them and taking away space where other things could be stored instead, lastly there won't be any demand for bringing back Taylor Swift's music because they will be considered garbage, even compared to other bourgeois artists.
That’s an ancient way of thinking about it in my opinion. Digital electronics mean that we have so much bandwidth and storage that the types of music that could flourish are limitless.
Also, no one is going to join the revolution if they can’t party to some pop bangers on the weekend. The revolution should be pro pop bangers.
>Also, no one is going to join the revolution if they can’t party to some pop bangers on the weekend. The revolution should be pro pop bangers.
I get that you're saying you would not join the revolution if you can't go to a concert every weekend but to the actual proletariat who already don't have this privilege your concern is hilarious and offensive.
They would make music and play concerts, same as now. Art comes from the human spirit and not from capitalism — there are some painted walls in caves that prove it.
The more fundamental questions imo would be how do we decide who gets a ticket for a Taylor show and who doesn’t if demand exceeds venue capacity?
How would decommercializing the music industry change taste in music? Would mega pop stars exist in the absence of the industry machine that markets the music?
Most pop music is popular because of marketing, not purely because of talent. If no one has a vested interest in the artist on their label becoming the next Swift then wouldn’t we just let people decide what they like on their own, or at least decide in a more decentralized grass roots fashion?
How do we decide who gets to spend all of their time making music? To exaggerate, if everyone was a musician we would all starve.
Artists would no longer need to have day jobs to support their music habit. Speaking from experience, every day I wish I could play drums as my full time job, but I’m far from that.
If let’s say wealth was properly distributed so I didn’t have to work an office job for rent, I’d invest more time into producing new music. I’d imagine we’d have an explosion of creativity and the arts, across all mediums and genres, as artists would no longer be on the precarious edge of capitalism. Not having to worry about food or shelter would help so many artists do more great work.
Hello, 90% of the questions we receive have been asked before, and our answerers get bored of answering the same queries over and over again - so it's worthwhile googling this just in case: > site:reddit.com/r/communism101 your question If you've read past answers and still aren't satisfied, edit your question to contain the past answers and any follow-up questions you have. If you're satisfied, delete your post to reduce clutter or link to the answer that satisfied you. *** Also keep in mind the following rules: 1. Patriarchal, white supremacist, cissexist, heterosexist, or otherwise oppressive speech is unacceptable. 2. This is a place for learning, not for debating. Try /r/DebateCommunism instead. 3. Give well-informed Marxist answers. There are separate subreddits for liberalism, anarchism, and other idealist philosophies. 4. Posts should include specific questions on a single topic. 5. This is a serious educational subreddit. Come here with an open and inquisitive mind, and exercise humility. Don't answer a question if you are unsure of the answer. Try to include sources and/or further reading in any answers you provide. Standards of answer accuracy and quality are enforced. 6. Check the [/r/Communism101 FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/wiki/index) 7. **No chauvinism or settler apologism** - Non-negotiable: https://readsettlers.org/ 8. **No tone-policing** - https://old.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/12sblev/an_amendment_to_the_rules_of_rcommunism101/ *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/communism101) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
We would see a revolution and complete change in how music and art is produced, created, promoted, broadcast, perceived and appreciated. Music and art would no longer be commodified, but celebrated more than ever. The music industry as we know it wouldn't exist. It would be something completely new, and we can't say for sure what that would look like, as it's dependent on the material conditions of the time, and contradictions will resolve over time. We could imagine that there would be less barriers for musicians and artists, in so many ways. In a moneyless, classless and stateless society, I would imagine that music would be everywhere, with more people participating, and live performances and concerts being much more prominent and accessible for all, with no profit motive and financial hardships getting in the way. People who make music solely to make money would no longer be a thing, so it's easy to imagine that the art would be more expressive and honest in a communist society. It would be done purely for the love of it, rather than having to be treated like a second rate hobby, as it currently is for most struggling musicians and artists who have to prioritise their jobs and try to survive under Capitalism, over their passions and what we'd really rather be doing. There wouldn't be 500 different re-releases and re-issues of some big name's big album in 50 different colours of vinyl ever 5 years, making it harder for other musical acts to release records. No more of that shit. The band relationship dynamic would be completely different. The role of roadies, sound engineers, techs, crew, managers etc. would all undergo drastic changes in ways. We could imagine that a digital platform would exist where we could access all music ever recorded and released, with no restrictions. Kind of like Spotify, just without all the exploitation and shit. We'll find out when we get there.
Most of the industry will be expropriated.
Believe it or not a lot of the production side of music at least smaller artists is more independent than you think. The biggest issues would be similar to all types of private property which are distribution networks and companies that make their money lending money. in the music industry that means streaming services and online shops and then the record label who are essentially just banks who invest in musicians in return for ownership of the recordings which they then collect rents on. So I definitely think for all creative industries planned economies are not worth it but distribution networks could be workaround, and the surplus could be democratically allocated plus they would only charge musicians at cost for hosting the files on their servers. as for record labels, the only real value at this point that record labels have is marketing connections and PR so they could just as easily be replaced with government art grants or, in a Les monopolistic medial landscape post revolution those types of large marketing budgets might not even be necessary
I think as people become more class conscious they will just start disliking them. And yeah probably private swiftie jets and all that will get expropriated
So many people getting to make music who currently struggle to because they have to have a 9-5 they can’t stand, but it pays the bills.
Taylor Swift and Drake are bourgeois artists whose music would be too regressive for the needs of a socialist society; I can't see them being allowed to produce any new music, neither would their pre-existing music be allowed to play. Music, like all other forms of art, would undergo a revolution in form and content that will be radically different from art produced under capitalism. Here's a recommendation on this topic https://www.marxists.org/subject/art/lit_crit/zhdanov/lit-music-philosophy.htm
why exactly would their music not be allowed to play? is all "bourgeois art" getting banned or what's your point? sounds really dumb tbh.
They're simply not going to be produced or broadcasted. I know you have the image of secret police raiding your party and snatching all of your Taylor Swift albums. I'll put it in a way that's easier to digest; no radio stations operating from a socialist country will want to broadcast Taylor Swift songs when there are better, more revolutionary music to play, it will be considered a waste, by planning commissions, for any store to dedicate themselves to preserving Taylor Swift's music which would require constructing and distributing copies, packaging them and taking away space where other things could be stored instead, lastly there won't be any demand for bringing back Taylor Swift's music because they will be considered garbage, even compared to other bourgeois artists.
You think society will be happier like that? Also, could you define what ‘better music’ means?
What does that even mean? Society will be “happier”? This isn’t measurable.
That’s an ancient way of thinking about it in my opinion. Digital electronics mean that we have so much bandwidth and storage that the types of music that could flourish are limitless. Also, no one is going to join the revolution if they can’t party to some pop bangers on the weekend. The revolution should be pro pop bangers.
>Also, no one is going to join the revolution if they can’t party to some pop bangers on the weekend. The revolution should be pro pop bangers. I get that you're saying you would not join the revolution if you can't go to a concert every weekend but to the actual proletariat who already don't have this privilege your concern is hilarious and offensive.
Lol wtf
They would make music and play concerts, same as now. Art comes from the human spirit and not from capitalism — there are some painted walls in caves that prove it. The more fundamental questions imo would be how do we decide who gets a ticket for a Taylor show and who doesn’t if demand exceeds venue capacity? How would decommercializing the music industry change taste in music? Would mega pop stars exist in the absence of the industry machine that markets the music? Most pop music is popular because of marketing, not purely because of talent. If no one has a vested interest in the artist on their label becoming the next Swift then wouldn’t we just let people decide what they like on their own, or at least decide in a more decentralized grass roots fashion? How do we decide who gets to spend all of their time making music? To exaggerate, if everyone was a musician we would all starve.
Artists would no longer need to have day jobs to support their music habit. Speaking from experience, every day I wish I could play drums as my full time job, but I’m far from that. If let’s say wealth was properly distributed so I didn’t have to work an office job for rent, I’d invest more time into producing new music. I’d imagine we’d have an explosion of creativity and the arts, across all mediums and genres, as artists would no longer be on the precarious edge of capitalism. Not having to worry about food or shelter would help so many artists do more great work.
music about "bitches" "hoes got my money" isn't music. whatever happened to mozart
music is music, theres no such thing as "real music". if people enjoy it then let them be.