This is probably more of an /mu/ question but I feel I would get a more serious answer from /his/
Why didn't punk rockers in the 70s and 80s actually do anything more than complain about the government and society? They seemed to have had the motivation and drive for change but wasted it. It seems most were just in it for the drugs and a good time and music and politics came second. There were many visionaries and idealists for people to get behind but nothing seemed to formulate.
>Why didn't punk rockers in the 70s and 80s actually do anything more than complain about the government and society?
What exactly did you want them to do?
>>1413244
Because it's their professional careers and image you fucktard.
>>1413244
>They seemed to have had the motivation and drive for change
Even if they did, they sublimated it into music. When revolution dies, it becomes art.
>>1413285
Revolt, actually fight for change and simply do what they say they want to do in their songs.
>>1413244
Because they were all a bunch of dumb kids high from huffing glue.
Do you really expect the likes of pic related to get his act together and lead some kind of political movement?
>>1413330
I expected at least some action from the big talk he had.
Because it was just an image for the bands with very very few exceptions like pic related
>>1413348
I'm not very familiar with them but I have heard them before. How were they any different than any of the other bands in actually doing instead of just observing and making songs of their observations?
>>1413244
They were druggy musicians, not political or religious leaders. The record industry found people liked them and they were cheaper than established bands like Pink Floyd, Led Zepellin, etc.
But I like the whole DIY thing and the music in general.
>>1413377
They were literal anarchists who lived in a squat and everything.
They were also a terrible band.
