Music is no longer a social movement. Back in the day being a fan of the Clash went far beyond music you were joining a social/political movement, something you believed in. Katy Perry might sing a catchy tune but its all about her personal ego, Joe Strummer say himself as a Che Guevara, a revolutionary socialist leader, a lot more than just a singer of hit songs. Songs became hits because they gave you a vision you could believe and participate in.
Look harder, I'd say. See Bar25 in Berlin and the sound that is heard there (Katermukke label, etc.). Or Berghain and it's sound (Ostguton label, etc.). Hell yeah music and "social/political movement" are still as linked as ever. There's still a whole "roots" reggae/dub scene world wide that would besides social/political also come with an embedded spiritual and/or religious movement. Revolutionary hip-hip, like Dead Prez or Immortal, is still strong. In Europe there's still Freetekno. I could go on.
Hell no revolutionary vibes from K. Perry! But it's still there.
> Songs became hits because they gave you a vision you could believe and participate in.
Yes. It's not advertised. They do not hit the charts anymore. So what. Shun the charts. We've got soundcloud, they've got ad-ridden radio and MTV.
> Music is no longer a social movement. Back in the day being a fan of the Clash went far beyond music you were joining a social/political movement, something you believed in. Katy Perry might sing a catchy tune but its all about her personal ego
I don't think the Clash ever had the kind of mainstream success that someone like Katy Perry has. A more appropriate analogue for "back in the day" would be like Andy Gibb or someone.
