Backlash to Capitalism Part One: Indie Music

The culture we live in is based solely on “getting ahead in life.”  We spend our entire youth training to be a profitable member of society.  We then spend our entire lives buying bigger houses, nicer cars, and fancier clothes.  But there is certain fringes of society where these prospects are actually frowned upon. 

In the independent music subculture it is genuinely disapproved of to become commercially successful.  There is an entire group of teenagers and young adults that will shun their favourite artists based solely on them reaching what is generally considered to be “success.”  The music itself can remain completely unchanged, yet the it’s no longer desirable.

But why is it considered cool to like music that isn’t earning any money?

In this case, most of the people involved don’t necessarily look at the financial aspect directly, but instead focus on the music itself entering the mainstream music world.  If it becomes a popular success, then the song is no longer part of the fringe group, the subculture enjoyed by so many.  But in a society where the almighty dollar is held above any other consideration, this seems counterintuitive.

The aspects of the capitalist system that requires a person to be trained to participate must be examined to truly understand what’s happening here.  In our youth, we are taught that everybody is special; that every single person can change the world.  What we’re not told is that it’s not the person, but the amount of influence they hold that allows that to happen.  The primary symbol of influence is money.  So, with this ommission, we are lead to believe that every person has the power to influence the world around them.

Before we learn this is almost entirely untrue, we hold a special respect for those that try to make a difference through more personal means.  In this case, that is music. 

But when an artist reaches commercial success, the personal aspect is almost entirely removed.  Whereas a person attending a show at a local club can actually participate and be part of the show, you are relegated to a simple spectator at larger venues. For an independent artist, by paying for admission, or buying a CD you’re showing your personal support.  But once that same artist reaches commercial success the personal aspect is taken away. 

What is it about capitalism that requires people to be trained to participate?  What is it about capitalism that makes it seem so unnatural for such a large group of young adults? 

Money is a symbol of the exchange of goods and services, but without the actual trade occurring.  It’s not a personal transaction; you’re not giving to receive, but instead showing that you have given, and you want to receive.  It is not about doing something, performing a task for another, but simply a completely impersonal “purchase.”

And when you’re attending a show to help support your favourite local artist, you are essentially paying that person to continue making music.  You are becoming a part of what they are doing by contributing to that person as respect for their passion.  After commercial success, you’re simply using money as a tool to purchase a CD as another tool.  The artist no longer has appreciation for your contribution.  Everyone else in your country bought that same CD.  You’re no longer supporting a person who’s trying to make a difference, but buying a piece of equipment to hear music.

That is why independent music will always remain a subculture within our youth.

Take a look at the top ten commercially successful songs of all time to see what the capitalist point of view has accomplished.  More harm than good? You decide.