Why are conservatives so good at making good and popular music?

Why are conservatives so good at making good and popular music?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
youtube.com/watch?v=PqMZ-XIikDg
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

It's easy.

These dweebs are republicans? I've got another reason to hate them? You got a source for that?

OP has no basis but I think what he means is that they're from Ohio.

Pic not related

>Hurr durr republicans

found the republican

>Hurr durr the last five presidents republicans have elected have been absolutely terrible for our country

no sympathy for idiots

Thankfully this one will make America great again.

not any better with democrats desu senpai

>Implying Eisenhower was terrible for our country

uh by what measure? socially, that's laughable. foreign affairs? democrats have engaged in the continuation of wars started by republicans, but have largely attempted to reduce involvement in them. I voted for Obama but I was also a huge critic of his use of drone strikes, so yeah, that's a point against a democratic president I guess. domestic economic success? look at what Obama inherited, versus where the country was at when he became a lame duck. look at what Clinton inherited, and where the country was when he left office.

but i'm sure you'll keep plugging your ears and ignoring that. if you're a republican who truly believes that the country is better under any republican politician in the past two decades, i expect nothing less. if you're arguing horseshoe theory, that's absolutely fucking ridiculous.

He's right but 21 Pilots are still shit.

both because they're (probably?) not conservative, and because they don't make good music. it is popular, though, so at least they have that going for them.

Wagner was pretty much the opposite of conservative for most of his life.

Reminder that The Republican Party was founded primarily to oppose slavery created by Democrats. I don't believe your shitty party is any more moral or reasonable today.

Reminder that the values of the parties have changed drastically over the years, dummy.

Reminder that since then, the values of the parties have almost entirely switched.

Democrats started to endorse civil rights, and made it central to the party in like the 30s-60s. Republicans who took this view as well were basically pushed out of the party, lost support of the Republican voters and establishment almost entirely. Southern Democrats felt betrayed by the party, and started voting Republican instead.

In 1964 when Goldwater was nominated by the Republicans, that was a good sign of the direction the party was going (conservative). When he lost, the Republicans doubled-down basically, and took a more populist route, hence Reagan's victory.

Honestly, do you really think Abraham Lincoln is closer to the modern Republican party than the modern Democrat party?

Learn history and research your bullshit claims before you make them.

Reminder that le two parties are exactly the same top-right-square Neocon bullshit that should be purged.

Bring back independent politicians only.

anybody that claims to be a "Broken People" is not a conservative

addendum: forgot to link this en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

worth looking through if you actually believe what the dude i responded to said

>being this retarded
I'm not even Republican, but you can't honestly be this ignorant of politics

literally no intelligent people are alt right, prove me wrong.

>he likes Obama and Clinton
Why do you support war criminals user

>Reminder that since then, the values of the parties have almost entirely switched.
Not really dude. Neither party is similar to either OG Republicans or Democrats
>Reminder that the values of the parties have changed drastically over the years, dummy.
This is a more accurate statement.

Literally no intelligent people are social justice warriors, prove me wrong.

Literally everyone is stupid, prove me wrong.

name a recent president who isn't a fucking "war criminal" since I assume I can't convince you that either of them aren't.

that's fair, neither is quite like the originals, the second thing you linked is more accurate to what I was saying. I was more focused on outlining how the recent, relevant changes happened for that dude I responded to.

james woods

>name a recent president who isn't a fucking "war criminal" since I assume I can't convince you that either of them aren't.
now you're asking the right questions

none :^)

hate to break it to you but a great deal of "intellectuals" fight for social justice. because social justice, you know, isn't something that should be at all objectionable to reasonable humans?

most "intellectuals" are not smart people. they're like libertarians. they normally have degrees and are well read but they're idiots.

lol then who the fuck is "smart" then?

people that listen to j. cole

They're religious I think, so I guess that's why he's saying they're "conservatives"

Come ride on my helicopter kid

The smart leftists are people like Noam Chomsky, people who never had the nous to get a proper job so they just stayed in a university their entire lives

Smart conservatives are the people who start businesses and change the world

>because social justice, you know, isn't something that should be at all objectionable to reasonable humans?
Hahahaha. Most people are too busy making money to care about that my friend

>caring about artists political views

People who stay observant and cautious without mouthing off like they know what's best for the world like a goddamn ego superman.

This goes for SJW's and Alt right faggots alike.

well that's a pretty reductive view of the world. believing that, no wonder you think all lefties are idiots.

>people who start businesses and change the world

you mean something like Microsoft? Old Billy Gates isn't too busy making money to care about social justice. Plus, it's quite a reach to call him stupid.

>People who stay observant and cautious without mouthing off like they know what's best for the world

then who the fuck is a smart person? like, name one. if all the smart people didn't see ways in which the world could be better, then the world would never get better.

people can see ways that they think they can improve the world without acting like they know for sure or that they are the only ones that are right. mlk was a flawed man, but he wanted to make a change in the world. he did what i thought was best, but he never acted like it was the only way or disregarded others opinions

do you REALLY think that MLK didn't think he knew what was best for the world, i.e. civil rights? show me where MLK said something to the effect of what you're saying, like "I'm not really sure if we black people deserve rights, maybe racists have a point, but I'm still going to literally dedicate my life to it."

Okay I'll take the bait. Who of Trump, Bush, Bush, Reagan, and Nixon would you say has had a net positive impact?

Posting in derailed thread.

>this whole thread

he was an extremely open person. he acknowledged that other people wanted society to be a certain way (malcom x and the black separatist movement) but he argued for his side. he even acknowledged that they had some merit. but it wasn't how he wanted the future to be.

you're totally ignoring the fact that X and MLK were two sides of the same coin. King obviously wasn't a total separatist, but they generally coincided in terms of beliefs. King got along with them BECAUSE of that. you dodged my question, King clearly felt he knew what was best for the world, and spoke out about it, and sought to change it. Obviously a very smart dude, too. So that really runs counter to your original argument, that smart people don't claim to know the way the world should be. Shit, King's most famous piece of work, the I Have a Dream speech, is all about HIS vision of the way the world should be.

>hating people for the political and/or religious views


how do people like you still exist on Sup Forums in 2017

AND THIS IS WHERE HERBIE COMES IN.

youtube.com/watch?v=PqMZ-XIikDg

Herbieanon is my favorite person on Sup Forums

Yeah, and?

I said "cautious and observant", and not speaking like you KNOW for certain what is best. Because you don't. Even MLK didn't know what's best. Did you ever think that maybe black and white people might NEVER be able to get along, and that trying to heal the wound only will create a greater problem later? I'm not saying this true, by the way. I don't KNOW, but it's as logical a possibility as achieving peace and brotherhood.

MLK is punchline to much of the black community. He didn't achieve what he wanted, and when he died, many of the ideas in his beautiful rhetoric died with him. Would it be better had he never existed? Maybe, maybe not. We'll never know.

My point is simple, only the fool believes he is wise. That doesn't mean "say and do nothing", it means be observant and careful in what you say, because "knowing your right" is just egoism. You literally can never know the butterfly effect of your actions.

>he hasn't heard about the 2016 American presidential election

>I'm in Lowe's buying building supplies
>21 Faggots on the p.a.
>fucking elevator muzak

>I said "cautious and observant", and not speaking like you KNOW for certain what is best

I showed quite clearly how King spoke like he knew what was best.

>Did you ever think that maybe black and white people might NEVER be able to get along, and that trying to heal the wound only will create a greater problem later?

No, and it doesn't seem that King did either, again, judging by the absolute easiest example possible, his most famous speech. He said quite literally the opposite of that.

>MLK is punchline to much of the black community. He didn't achieve what he wanted, and when he died, many of the ideas in his beautiful rhetoric died with him. Would it be better had he never existed? Maybe, maybe not. We'll never know.

You brought him up... I was asking for an example of a smart person, by your absolutely ridiculous metrics (smart people don't make claims to know about the way the world should be). This in no way disproves what I was saying, nor does it prove what you were saying.

>My point is simple, only the fool believes he is wise. That doesn't mean "say and do nothing", it means be observant and careful in what you say, because "knowing your right" is just egoism. You literally can never know the butterfly effect of your actions.

Obviously no one can literally KNOW that they are right. But you're being obtuse. Especially considering the example you used, MLK, claimed to know the way the world should be, and (by non-white-supremacist standards) was actually right. Meaning he was actually a smart guy (which is something you agreed with, when you brought him up) who spoke out with confidence (not cautiousness) about the way he believed the world should be.