I think you might be a bit off base there - certainly there were leftists at that time who did not know how bad Stalin was, and how bad the Soviet system was.
Does that apply to a man who nakedly changes his stance about whether the US should enter WWII to whatever Stalin’s view happens to be? After all, one’s position toward war against the Nazis could have been developed entirely according to one’s own beliefs about what was good for the country and the world at that time.
And while someone can be wrong on this, doesn’t it make it a bit suspect when he’s later fighting for things like civil rights? I have said before that Communists may have a good civil rights record in this country but not elsewhere, and this makes sense since we they never held real power here. If they did they would have racked up abuses plenty, since their idea of equality is everyone being roughly the same height because they’re on their knees.
On the other hand, he’s a good banjo player, so props to him for that.
You do know that before Pearl Harbour quite a few Americans believed in remaining neutral in WW2?
No, not at all. Why on earth would it?
It seems to me that communism is still treated like the boogie man by some Americans. I live in Greece where the communist party routinely gets about 10% of the vote. Being a communist does not automatically make you evil.
Just last week I saw a documentary on PBS about the Smothers Brothers show. And, of course, Seeger performing “Big Muddy” back in 1968 was given major treatment in the documentary. I remember that Sunday evening like it was yesterday - and the song never fails to chill me to the bone!
Look, I’ve said that Pete Seeger was in error in his support for Stalin. Pete Seeger has said that Pete Seeger was in error in his support for Stalin. What is your point here?
Listen, life is a bit more messy and complicated than you seem to think, and whilst you’re living it you don’t have the benefit of historical hindsight (I made the point above about the number of brutal dictators the US has supported for one reason or another.)
If you really want to know a bit more about the Almanac Singers and what they did or did not support, then read this.
Jesus Christ, people. Annie opened this thread as a celebration of Pete Seeger’s life. If you right wingers want to question his worthiness, how about opening your own damn thread in Great Debates instead of shitting in this one?
Thank you Biffy. My philosphy is that there’s damn few things I’m gonna get down on people for, provided they admit what they are. If you’re a shit, admit you’re a shit and then move on.
As others have pointed out, Pete’s life has been an open book. He never denied his belief in and support of Communism, and he helped the Weavers when they were blacklisted. “The man behind the curtain” analogy is misplaced.
And I for one am glad he made 90 and got honored and celebrated.
Annie, sounds like a great concert! I have a friend who works at the Garden - will have to ask her if she was there too!
Oddly, I was just thinking of Joan Baez the other day and wondering if she was still performing; also was wondering about Judy Collins. Seems like a lot of folk singers simply fell off the face of the earth in the early 70’s and practically disappeared by the 80’s.
I used to go to quite a few of those (mostly anti-war) folk concerts back in the day.
Oh, and to really piss off some who are reading this thread, I also like Jane Fonda and went to see her speak at an anti-war rally at my university.
I have also seen Ritchie Havens and Arlo Guthrie perform a few times (thankgod for Arlo or nobody could never finish a crossword puzzle.) The mother of a friend of mine in college was a close personal friend of Woody Guthrie. Ah - the memories - good times, good times.
Another longtime folk singer who performed last night and hasn’t been mentioned is Tom Paxton. He turned 70 last October, and he too has been married to Midge forever.
And a huge thank you to my second ex-husband Erik, who got me into American folk music thirty years ago.
Well, personally I think if you want to reflect on a man’s life you might want to look at the whole thing. This thread is like talking about Anita Bryant and scolding anyone who drifts away from talking about beauty pageants, “Paper Roses” and orange juice.
Joan Baez continues to tour the world & support her causes. Steve Earle produced her last album; it sold well.
Judy Collins also spends a lot of time on the road. She recently produced her own “tribute” album–featuring Joan Baez, Dolly Parton, Chrissie Hynde & more of the usual (& unusual) suspects.
Joan’s career has lasted 50 years; Judy’s a bit less.
So, considering the misery Communism has inflicted on millions of people wherever it’s been tried, what does that make a Communist or anyone who admires them? And what is the reason they get only 10% of the vote? Perhaps people are too smart to fall for their propaganda?
You don’t think actively assisting Communism is a big deal. We disagree.
That’s a big help to the people someone has shit on.
Actually, no. I really didn’t know about his Communism and how Communism fundamentally co-opted folk music until recently. Call me clueless, but I can’t be the only one. And as for never denying his belief, he didn’t exactly make sure everyone knew it.
Angry, no. But fighting ignorance is often fruitless. It really does take longer than one might think.
You aren’t suggesting I should accept it just because Obama approves, are you? Or that I shouldn’t dissent? In any case that didn’t elevate my opinion of Seeger–it just lowered my opinion (already low) of Obama (who I did not vote for).
How old are you? Do you know anything about the 1930’s, 40’s, 50’s or any decade previous to this one? “Co-opted” doesn’t mean what you seem to think it means but–did you ever see Bob Roberts?
Anita Bryant’s main claim to fame is that she’s an enormous homophobe. Pete Seeger’s main claim to fame is not that he once performed on an album that no one bought that had three anti war songs on that he didn’t write.
You didn’t bother reading that link, did you?
The man sang songs. He didn’t sell nuclear secrets to the commies - get a grip.
Absolutely not. Freedom of speech and association and all that . . .
Well now, if he’s just a singer and someone of little importance, why is it a big deal that he’s having a birthday?
You’re simultaneously trying to state his importance as an artist and minimize the effect he had as one. Forgive me - I don’t think that works.
If we were to note other artists here with certain failings, they would be discussed even in a Cafe thread. We wouldn’t minimize Hemmingway’s suicide, for instance, or Salinger’s reclusiveness. Why do you and other posters want to just breeze past the fact that Seeger was a Stalinist - indeed, his break with the Communist Party in the 1950’s coincided with Khrushchev’s denunciation of Stalin. He remained a Stalinist far longer than any decent man looking at objective evidence should have - probably into the 1990s.
It’s a big deal to the people who like his songs. If you don’t then you have no need to be involved in the thread.
No, sorry, I can’t forgive you as you are deliberately misconstruing my words. His merits as an artist and civil rights and environmental campaigner are not diminished by any wrong-headed support of Stalin.
Well that’s not quite as weird as your Anita Bryant comparison, but it’s just as irrelevant (Hemingway with one m, by the way).
I haven’t breezed past a single thing, whilst you and others have left several of my responses unanswered.
You’ll have to prove that, I’m afraid. It certainly became an issue in the 90s and Seeger felt compelled to answer attacks on himself, but I very much doubt he was a Stalin fan at that point.