Like a lot of people out there, I’m going to miss the magnificent weirdo that was David Bowie. While the rest of us listen to our favorite Bowie songs on repeat, the not-so-good folks at Infowars — conspiracy theory central — are actually celebrating the musician and cultural icon’s death.
In a post titled DAVID BOWIE: A NON-APPRECIATION, Darrell Y. Hamamoto suggests that Bowie, who died of cancer, was himself a symptom of “civilizational cancer.”
After several paragraphs of mostly incoherent throat-clearing, which sort of suggest (among other things) that Bowie was responsible not only for Gary Glitter’s fashion sense but also his sexual abuse and exploitation of children, Hamamoto presents us with his thesis, declaring that Bowie’s
death is the capstone on the pyramid of necrotic Anglo-American mass culture spanning a half-century of civilizational cancer away so fantastic and unreal that leads one to suspect that “Bowie” (Born David Robert Jones) sprang from the twisted, fervid minds of social psychologists residing at the Tavistock Institute.
That was all one sentence.
Oh, and in case you’re wondering, the Tavistock Institute is a nearly 70-year-old British think-tank that does work in psychology and the social sciences; it’s a favorite bugbear of assorted conspiracy theorists, who blame it for, among other things, the brainwashing of American prisoners of war in Korea, the CIA’s MK Ultra program, and The Beatles.
Anyway, Hamamoto is pretty stoked by the news of Bowie’s passing, declaring that
the Death of David Bowie might presage a new era of spiritual regeneration that is the precondition of civilizational health and advancement.
Skimming through the more than one thousand comments left on Hamamoto’s post so far, it appears that there are not a lot of Bowie fans in the house.
Someone called daf declares that
Bowie was an agent of the NWO, forging acceptance for gender identity politics re: transvestites, transgender, gays… Not to mention furtherance of the ET/ Alien meme that the NWO sought to advance. Listen to the music: is it really that good? Nah.
“The Hebrew Institute,” meanwhile, argues that
David Bowie can kiss my ass… he was a fuckin satanistic edomite who is rotting in the pit for his homosexual acts and overtones to accept that behavior not of God and he is now paying for it….may he keep rotting in the pit of hell to which he deserves AMEN.
Blahblahblah is clearly not a big fan of Bowie’s unique style:
He was a Luciferian puppet, spreading NWO agenda through music like so many others. Look at the lightning bolt on his face.
But not everyone in the comments is quite so enamored of Hamamoto’s analysis. Indeed, one longtime Infowars listener was so appalled by the post, and the responses to it, that they decided to become a former listener:
After years of being a dedicated listener, observer and supporter of this program I just cut ties with you all together. … I’ve stuck up for your articles and it’s caused me a lot of social consternation … your OPINIONS and ASSUMPTIONS in this matter are so far off base it makes me want to vomit on my computer screen. Then reading the hateful comments on this page about homosexuals and FREAKS makes me want to jump this boat and join the illuminated manipulators … The fact of the matter is that this was a talented human being with much love and talent to offer the world and the author ties this in to some “homosexual illuminati occult agenda” … [T]hat I have supported such a bigoted support base here is something I am ashamed of after all these years.
Good for you.
In case you’re not familiar with Infowars, here’s Alex Jones, the dude who runs the place. And yes, the tantrum in the video is a real one. He’s got some anger issues.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIkoV7RAda4
And here are a couple of videos of Bowie performing in 1972.
Yesterday, I put together a little playlist of some of my favorite Bowie songs on Spotify.
Sorry, Alex Jones; you will be remembered, if at all, as an embarrassment to humanity. Bowie will be remembered as a musical and cultural legend, albeit a far from perfect human being.
EDIT: I reworded the ending to take into account Bowie’s reported rape of underage “groupie” Laurie Maddox, which I didn’t know about when I originally wrote the piece. (I say “reported,” because I wasn’t there and he wasn’t charged much less convicted for it, but Maddox’s account is all-too-plausible; I believe her.)
@ Orion
You raise some very interesting points. I’ll try not to derail the thread by going into a legal treatise so I’ll just briefly mention a few points.
Your comment on the irrationality of judging someone by consequences rather than intentions is something reflected on English law. In fact the example you give about killing someone through drink driving is a facet of that.
As English law adopted the ‘intent not outcome’ basis for culpability it used to be the case that the only way you could prosecute someone in that situation was to argue that their actions were so risky they met the test for manslaughter. But juries would rarely convict in such cases. Don’t forget, this was In a time when drink driving was seen as morally acceptable and something ‘everyone did’. So juries adopted a there but for the grace of god goes I attitude and acquitted .
A special offence of causing death by dangerous driving was created for cases where the driving was so bad the outcome should have been predicted, just so juries might convict.
With careless driving though it was accpeted that everyone drove carelessly from time to time. Normally there were no consequences and it was just pure bad luck if something bad did happen because someone stepped out in front of you or whatever.
In fact, in a careless driving case that resulted in death, prosecutors were prohibited from mentioned the death in case it prejudiced the bench!
It’s only recently that a new offence of causing death by careless driving has been introduced here to cover such situations. It’s controversial because it can be seen as punishing bad luck rather than conduct, but there had been a clamour from families affected In such cases and some press campaigns that created a ‘something must be done’ atmosphere in the legislature.
“(I also think Chilly Down is underappreciated. Yes, it’s pretty random, but that whole movie is pretty random, and it’s thematically relevant.)”
Huh. Yeah, I see what you mean.
It’s saddening to learn this about David Bowie.
I was even more depressed to learn recently that John Peel — a legendary tastemaker who championed a number of bands/musicians I love — was apparently obsessed with underage groupies.
And yes it was the 70s, but people knew then it was wrong, even if they were more likely to joke about it or dismiss it than people are today.
This is a super tricky issue. On the one hand, clearly she should be the most important voice in a discussion about something that happened to her, and it does feel silencing on some level to say her opinion doesn’t matter because it was wrong in any case, especially if his opinion is being considered.
On the other hand, considering the fact that she doesn’t regret it to be a mitigating factor is really uncomfortably close to “she wanted it.”
Can I just say that threads like this one are why WHTM is my favourite feminist site?
I don’t think that’s a conservative trait, or a liberal trait, or that such traits even really exist. We’re all human and prone to the same vices and weaknesses regardless of our politics. Certain weaknesses may lend themselves more towards one way of thinking or another, but we can’t ever let ourselves believe that our politics make us less susceptible to groupthink and hero worship than the other guys’. Thinking they’re above all that is one of the reasons the Republican party has gone so far off the rails.
@Holytape:
Were you here a couple months ago when Pro Patria Truth Teller kept dropping by (using a nym) and posting rants about how Random Famous Person was Totally Going Old-School Roman Catholic but those dirty Vatican II Liberals always killed them before they could endorse his specific talking points?
I honestly don’t miss that poster. I love trolls and gimmick accounts, as well as full-blown idiots, but that guy was just boring.
I thought he was hilarious.
Certain people on the left do tend to be more susceptible to hero worship, tribalism, and groupthink. But they’re usually to the left of the mainstream left in the sense that they think there needs to be some sort of violent confrontation before anything can get better. They’re mostly Maoists, Trotskyists, the more violent anarchists and left communists, left wing groups with their own paramilitary organizations, etc. In other words, they’re uber sectarians who can barely work with each other. Many radfems and TERFs come out of really rigid and sectarian groups.
The “left of the left” has pretty much zero influence on US politics and culture now aside from a few tiny student groups on college campuses. Most non-violent socialists support the left wing of the Democratic Party. Even the Communist Party (you know, the Communist Party) is basically a faction of the left in the Democratic Party and trade unions and downplays revolution and the Soviet way of doing things.
Sorry, but there’s no authoritarian leftist conspiracy to destroy America aside from a few old dudes who drink coffee and hang out at Barnes and Noble on the weekend.
Also I had no idea Bowie was a predator. Gross. That Jess Says person has it right. You have to condemn that shit, even if you like his work.
I’m sort of happy he’s dead now. I like Bowie as a character and as an idea. I suppose I hate him as a person. Anyone who abuses children is scum in my eyes. The least he could have done would be to own up to it and try to make things right somehow. Work toward preventing further abuse in the future. That’s the only way I could respect him.
lol I’ve literally never met an ancom terf. Maoist, sure, but ancom? No.
the sectarians you’re talking about are internet-dwelling teens. actual anarchists who do things in real life don’t behave like the snotty, pedantic assholes that you see on sites like Revleft. well, aside from the infighting. there’s always infighting, but it’s usually between us and Maoists/Stalinists/etc. They kind of have a history of attacking communism wherever it actually exists so yeah. We’re generally more focused on aiding vulnerable communities (often our own) through things like community gardens, outreach, workshops, etc., and bringing attention to fucked up shit through protest and other nonviolent action. We can’t do much in a country this backward and fucked up.
The real left (the left left you’re talking about, not the center-right that comprises the Democratic Party) is the only sane politics out there. Everything else is way, waaaay more violent than even edgelord insurrectionists.
You’re right about the Communist Party in the states though. Communist parties in bourgeois states have always been vaguely reactionary and pro-middle-class, ironically. had to do with trade deals/alliances/etc. with Warsaw Pact countries
@cointelpro
Let’s not go implying people’s political views are insane. Disagree with them all you like, but try to avoid the ableism.
Yeah, that’s more understandable. It’s one reason I haven’t spoken a lot about Bowie to certain friends of mine, if I even spoken about him to them at all.
This is true.
It gives me hope to see people who loved Bowie respond appropriately to what he did by condemning it.
“I’m sort of happy he’s dead now.”
Nice.
Dude, no. Not cool. Never cool.
But what is really known about what happened? What is certain and what speculation? I think some people appear to be a bit too quick condemning a man that has just died and that many people are mourning. And that “happy that he is dead” comment? Gross.
Long time reader, first time poster.
@ cointelpro
You haven’t really read the conversation being had here, have you? Classy.
I specifically said “more violent anarchists” because obviously not all anarcho-communists are like that.
Yeah, it’s funny how plausibly the CP transitioned from waiting from orders from Moscow to echoing the left of the Democratic Party.
http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/um-no.gif
Because the CP leaders felt they needed to copy someone else’s practical line, not because the Democrats are like the Cold War CPSU.
The whole Bowie revelation was a punch in the gut. I felt the same way I did when the Joan Jett / Jackie Fuchs story broke. It’s hard to lump them in with Woody Allen or Bill Cosby but sometimes we have to just take the hit and admit our heroes were scumballs.
It’s times like those when I want to wail and scream and insist there must be some way that these people can be redeemed, because … because… because something. I loved Bowie, dammit. :*( Ugh.
Let’s get down to brass tacks. Bowie fans want to know if he was a “good person”. No one wants to admire a bad person.
I get it. And I want that too. My username…well if you know who Lester Bangs is you know that I’m probably crazy about Bowie and that whole magnificent wreckage that was the early glam/prog/art rock scene.
Well I don’t know if Bowie was a good person. But a good person can do something bad. A good person can even do a lot of bad things.
20 years ago I was a much younger and dopier young guy and was dating a wonderful girl who was reticent about having sex. Interested, but reticent. I pouted and pouted, though, and finally got my way. It was a creepy thing to do. And I’m embarassed I acted that way. Am I a bad man?
The girl in question doesn’t think so, as we got married and have raised two wonderful children and built a happy and successful and supportive relationship. We love each other madly and I know that for us, at least, it will be to death do us part.
But 20 years ago I acted in a shitty fashion. I grew up, and got smart, and it looks like no harm no foul.
Was Bowie a good man? His acquaintances seem to think so. He’s done lots of good art, and some good activism, and inspires great love even in Lori Mattix/Maddox.
But he exercised shitty judgement, broke a law (if Lori’s story is true) and (may have) committed an immoral act that could have wreaked much damage in someone’s life if things had gone otherwise. He did something bad.
But all in all, I am comfortable believing that the person that died this week died a good man. Because we are all more than our worst moments.
The universal popularity of certain rock stars in the 70s, combined with post sexual liberation times. It must have given them unprecedented access to young female fans with seemingly nobody and nothing in the way.
So much so that they could happily have their photos taken with underage girls, in situations where those girls shouldn’t have been in the first place let alone with older men (drinking in bars/restaurants as per the linked article).
It’s impossible to know for sure, but I’d like to think Bowie, as an articulate and intelligent older man would have looked back on it and seen it for the clear abuse of power it was.