Goat wrote:
I can see where you're coming from. I'd say bands that do have leftist lyrics tend towards the mild socialist stance rather than the out-and-out Stalin was awesome types, of which very few metal bands do exist. And I see why a band would want to glorify its culture, even to the point of the victory-in-war types, but is comparing driving away from a crime scene and abandoning a woman to drown really comparable to ethnic cleansing? Sure, events are glossed over, but what does it say about a nation that they're willing to? The denial in Japan over the rape of Nanking, for example. It's a different discussion, however, and I agree with your final point, that it's nice to see something different, and it is highly interesting from a historical POV whether I agree with said massacres or no.
As far as metal bands with leftwing lyrics, you're probably right that most are more along the line of socialist rather than all out communist, which may be a reflection of something else entirely. I'm sure it'd be easier to find more examples in punk than metal. That said, we can at least speak hypothetically on what the reactions towards bands with a stronger leftwing lyrical and ideological approach would be by observing the reactions to communist/socialist symbolism vs. NS symbolism (ie. the trend of wearing hammer and scicle or Che Guevara shirts, and while these symbols seem to have transcended their original meanings (and one more point for capitalist massproduction), the very fact that these symbols barely make people bat an eyelash vs. the swastika is telling).
The other thing one might observe is that whether there are hardcore leftwing metal bands or not, does it really matter whether the lyrics or the bands verbal expression of ideology is not strong? While the NS bands tend to write more provocative, hardline lyrics they also tend to be just about as "active" in their ideology as the mild socialist bands...ie. really not active at all. The portrayal of extremity likely comes from black metal "tradition" rather than the skinhead scene itself since most band members don't seem (from what I know) to actually be members of active skinhead or other similar orgs (pagan front and similar supporting labels, as far as I'm concerned, is pretty much a joke and to call them an example of an active NS org would be a pretty big stretch). Compare these guys to the RAC scene who really do practice what they preach. And in that way they really are comparable to the metal bands that do portray a milder socialist ideology.
What I mean by that is that you have extreme leftwing orgs like AntiFa who are pretty more a bunch of violent thugs these days than most active skinhead orgs. The only acts of larger scale violence you hear about as far as politics in metal is concerned are from AntiFa, not even attached to the metal scene in any way, attacking black metal bands they deem to be "NS". Yet neither the "Nazis" nor "Sozis" within metal, no matter the degree of "extremity" displayed in lyrics (whether glorifying acts of genocide or simply writing mildly socialist lyrics) are really actually active on the streets. So at this point one might ask what exactly is the power of art in these instances, as well as the significance and role of art. If Drudkh are not particularly active themselves and if they do not declare themselves as attached to a particular ideology, how does this band function as an influence or as a piece of art? Do you refuse to read a book because it says something you don't like?
Just a side note, Goat this wasn't all totally in response to your post I kind of went off on a tangent
As for your comparison between the Kennedy issue and ethnic clensing, I would say that to the parents and family or the woman in question the issue would be just as important, or even moreso. When its someone you know and love that's been lost its going to hit home harder than an event that occurs an ocean and a continent away. If I were the person who had left another person to drown, it would not alleviate my guilt to know "well hey! At least I'm not as bad as Hitler!" To me its hard to talk about comparisons when it comes to human life. One person's life is precious to millions while another only matters to the child or parents left behind, while another still is just another body on the stack of bodies. Is human life really that inherently precious that sheer numbers create meaning rather than attachment to any individual? Personally, I am of the opinion that human life is not precious, as harsh a reality as that may be. The way I see it is, we attempt to prevent genocide because of our desire not to be the victims. Without that thought or attachment to the idea of "it could be me or my family", the fate of victims of any crime would be meaningless. Justification in and of itself is determined by time and place. So in short: yes, I'd say its comparable.
As for what glossing over such details says about a country. To me the Japanese far outdid the Nazis with Unit 731, not to mention the countless other questionable events in Japanese history that are swept under the carpet...but what does that say about Japan as a nation? Germany, on the one hand, has done more than its fair share in examining and coming to terms with the events of WWII, probably moreso than any other nation in the world. Certainly more than the US or Japan. On the other hand Japan has done little to nothing in coming to terms with its actions during WWII. Yet when we compare these two nations as developed nations, as two separate populations, as two separate governments I'm not sure the state of modern day Japan is really a result of, nor a reflection of those past actions.
Is modern Britain a despicable nation because of its actions against the Acadians? Is modern Portugal a despicable nation because of its role in the slave trade? Is the US better off because it didn't elect a President who caused the death of a campaign aid? I think history has taught us that even nations who own up to their own atrocities are perfectly capable of continuing to commit them. Many of the most "humanitarian" and "developed" nations today commit some of least "humanitarian" acts.
How does a band's ideology effect one's enjoyment of the music? How come joking about pedophilia has become more acceptable than being serious about NS ideology? I'm not saying either should be acceptable nor unacceptable, just that its a little strange the standards some people hold. It just goes to show that a standard or system can be created to successfully uphold any idea or perspective on whatever issue, and that any idea or attempt to defend or uphold any action can be "justified" in same shape or form, whether under the premise of a "joke" or what have you.
Damn, apparently I am a world-class rambler
Now that's funny! 
