Dispatches From the Culture Wars [Englisch] [Gebundene Ausgabe]

The subtitle was also troubling to me in that it begs the question: When did that spirit last exist? In other words, if the left "lost" teen spirit, what is the time frame Goldberg is using for when it last had it? It would appear that he may be referring way back to the Kennedy adminstration as the answer to that question. If so, that is troubling for 2 reasons. First, 40 years is way too long a time frame to assume that the left has had no "teen spirit". Is Goldberg suggesting that it existed in 1963 and prior, but not since? That is doubtful. Indeed, while not dispositive of whether the left has lost teen spirit, it should at least be noted that Democrats have won 4 of 10 elections since Kennedy's assasination (and 5 of 10 if one considers the 2000 election as a Democratic victory).

If Goldberg instead had in mind a more recent date for when the left last had teen spirit, it should have been specified more clearly so that the reader can compare and contrast what life was like when they had it and when they didn't. However Goldberg never really goes there. He points out how it is lacking in the past few years but never really tells us how the given issues might have been addresed (and by whom) at that (never identified) time when the spirit still exised.

A footnote: Having read "Shakedown" by Kenneth Timmerman, I was nauseated by Goldberg's constant paeans to Jessie Jackson, notwithstanding the fact that Jackson may not have tried a shakedown in the specific Eric Kronfeld/Polygram incident to which Goldberg refers.

In sum, while one might think that it is a benefit to have a book on this topic written by an "insider" (or at least a semi-insider), I feel that a book on a similar topic written by an outsider might have been more valuable since its focus would not have been so strongly tied solely to the experiences of one individual. In my mind, an example of a book on almost the exact same topic which did a better job of it is "Speaking Frankly" by Barney Frank. (In keeping with my rule for titles with colons in them, the portion of the title which precedes the colon is a pun--i.e. a play on Frank's name--while what follows--"What's Wrong With the Democrats and How to Fix It"--is what the book is actually about.) Even though the book [has been out for years] (Clinton was not even President!), it is still surprisingly applicable to the state of the Democratic party today. Moreover, because it is not confined, in tunnel vision fashion, to the author's own experiences, I felt that it was able to describe the problem more effectively than does Goldberg.

I was raised a conservative Mormon and I continue to hold fast my upbringing. But I was also raised on the Beatles, Hendrix, Led Zeppelin and San Francisco Bay Area bands. Eight kids later, I still play those records and my kids embrace most of it too.

Danny Goldberg was raised a liberal Democrat, attended Woodstock, met Hendrix, worked with Zeppelin, managed Kurt Cobain and worked with and signed many of the artists whose CDs I buy. Goldberg's account of his career through the 60's to 2003 is worth alone the price of the book. However, be prepared to bristle at his characterizations of our conservative heroes as well as his positive references to his liberal pals like Barbra Streisand, Michael Moore, Arianna Huffington, and other ACLU members.

But engage your mind a little. Shut off the radio for a day or so and let him talk to you one-on-one about his confrontations with the liberal elite and their placating arrogance. Let him vent his frustrations about Tipper and Al Gore and their disingenuous sincerety, or his indictment on Joe Lieberman, forever closing the door on any future political support. What you'll find is an honest voice, a man raised with consistent, righteous, social values. Goldberg's life represents learning through first-hand experience rather than second-hand dogma, a condition most of us conservatives suffer. And if you don't like his politics, then be prepared to get off your keister like he has for 30 years and do something about it.

No, I'm not liberal in disguise thumping a liberal's book. I just feel a little wiser after spending some time with Goldberg's life, his career in entertainment, and how they're inextricably connected with politics. As a result, I'm tending to believe that if we strip away the anger, the personal insults, and the holy cows of partisan ballot punching, we'll find a common bond in our humanity. And then we may realize that we've been really violently agreeing with each other.

"[And that] castles made of sand, melts into the sea eventually."
Jimi Hendrix

He spends the largest part of the book disagreeing with Tipper Gore about her campaign to label rock music, and Joe Lieberman about his attacks on Hollywood and entertainment. He points out that Bill Clinton won the youth vote in 1996 by 19 points, because Bob Dole spent so much time attacking Hollywood, but with Lieberman and Gore on the ticket in 2000, the youth vote was evenly divided between them and Bush. Just a small percentage of that vote in the Democrats direction would have turned that election around.

Goldberg makes some good points about how politicians have been veering close to censorship with their hand-wringing and committee hearings, and grandstanding. As a member of the ACLU and the music industry, Goldberg fears the infringement of the first amendment. He feels that the biggest problem for progressives is a dominant leftwing snobbery that is more interested in bland academic liberalism than the raw energetic rebellion of youth culture.

Goldberg's defense of the first amendment is as articulate as I've heard in the discussion, but he seems like his own worst enemy. While arguing that politicians are spending too much time attacking first amendment freedoms, he encourages politicians to attack second amendment freedoms. When Congress says that explicit material should be policed, Goldberg suggests that it's really guns that are dangerous. This is a mistake for two reasons.

First, Goldberg is saying that the artistic youth music and culture speaks to a great many people, but even the most explicit calls for sex and violence do nothing to influence youngsters. On the other hand, guns attached to no call for action cause people to do horrible things. History has always shown that ideas have greater consequences than armaments. Did the German arsenal cause World War II or was it the demagoguery of Hitler?

Second, by arguing to halt second amendment freedoms, Goldberg yields politicians the moral authority to halt first amendment freedoms. This is a big mistake, because the only argument you can make against censorship is a constitutional one. If the constitution can be ignored because of a popularly perceived danger, then it can be ignored anytime a crafty politician sees a ready voting block.

I think this is why Goldberg argues it's in the best interests of leftists to embrace popular culture. Since he has little faith in the original intent of the constitution he can only win the heart of worried liberals by demonstrating to them an untapped voting block, the young. This way they can still tinker with the constitution in ways that he approves of, but they won't mess with an industry that is close to his heart. But the idea that we can just convince politicians that rock music is bland but guns are dangerous isn't going to protect our rights in the long run.

I don't think he can win over the politicians he is trying to reach, because most kids cannot vote and all parents can. The fact that liberals like the Gores and Liebermans were worried about their own kids is a sign that all children rebel in some form and even liberal parents are somewhat fearful of it. And since all parents can vote, politicians on the Right and Left are going to pander to the biggest voting block. Clinton may have won more of the youth vote in 1996, but he truly liked pop culture and he didn't have to worry about angering parents because Perot was there to chew up Reagan Democrats and other independents.

The Gore campaign realized that traditional blue collar Democrats crossed the lines and voted Republican in 1980, 1984, 1988. Without the benefit of a rightwing challenger like Ross Perot in 2000, Gore would have to win a bigger percentage of white middle class voters to succeed. A few percentage points of parents vote was worth more than a few percentage points of youth vote.

Despite some disagreements, I leaned that I have a lot more in common with fellow citizens like Goldberg than politicians that share my views. Both Goldberg and I want our leaders to be driven by ideas and idealism, but they are really driven by winning elections. Thus, we're both frustrated by politicians that will trade our rights to pander to a voting block. I only wish I could convince Goldberg to join me in the protection of all constitutional freedoms. That unity, I think, is the only way we can keep the opportunists from selling us out for their own empowerment.

Anyway, I was happy to read a well argued book from a fellow citizen even if we don't agree on conclusions.