Punk has always been labeled as an aggressive subculture, but it's probably not the right understanding. For example, punk teenagers in China basically get together to drink, play, and entertain themselves; the American ones may be a lot more arrogant, but they are similar, isn't that the case with subcultures? Playing on your own, the external tension is actually more often because of the lack of social resources and has no actual power. Maybe the power of the BAT bosses' panties is far greater than the howling of a hundred punk bands. But these are not important, because no matter which country the punks, their "revolution" can only be boiled down to the venting of soldiers on paper and the injection of hormones, what can they do? The point is: can a society accommodate these cultural groups living below the surface?
It is said that once in Europe, the gypsies were regarded as the lowest group. Although they had no motherland, no fixed home, and no ambition to occupy the territory of any country, they were labeled as "low race" for no reason. Labels, wandering in the wind, sounds very romantic, but in fact they have been squeezed to the edge of human society. Is this a form of discrimination? Americans regard baseball and rugby as national sports. Generally speaking, in high school and college, if a young man can become an athlete of these two types of balls, basically even if he has entered the mainstream of society, he will be labeled as a player. Beautiful labels of "strong", "civilized", "progressive", they are the elites of American society in the future, and people will maintain some kind of positive expectation and respect for them to come sooner or later. We know that the ancestors of punk music also came from the United States. For example, Ramones, the originator of punk, although it was the birthplace, punk has been excluded from the mainstream from the minute it was born, and was compressed into the ground like the European Gypsies. . Before watching "Bomb City", although I knew that ordinary Americans didn't like punk very much, I didn't expect them to hate it so much. After a brief deliberation, the jury unanimously concluded that high school football player Cody murdered punk youth. Brian is not guilty because Cody is a civilized looking football player with a promising future, and Brian is a useless guy who just throws punk concerts and doodles all over the place. It seemed impossible for the former to murder the latter.
The absurdity of this is that if an American court dared to judge a person's likelihood of guilt based on skin color in the late twentieth century, the judge would not want to mess with it, but it is much easier to sentence a slain punk to an accident. , because these guys aren't upper class, they're not big black guys, they're nothing, just the kind of group every educated American wants to disappear, even though this group does nothing. I mentioned earlier: Can a society tolerate a subculture that doesn't break the law? This question is not only about subculture, in fact, what I want to know is: Where are the so-called boundaries of freedom and inclusiveness? The United States is already recognized as a free world by human society, but this discrimination against minorities still exists, so it can be seen that the boundaries of freedom still exist in the judgment of the majority of society. Sometimes we find that society is so unjust, but there is nothing we can do about it. Even if it is politically correct, it needs a group of voices with enough strength. For example, in the past two years, there has been a strong anti-sexual assault in the workplace, and there is a higher volume of "feminist rights". , the reason why these voices are heard is because the composition of these groups is more and more from the leaders or backbone of the society. And many, many tiny groups go unnoticed simply because they are too weak. Honestly, I don't think there are any bigwigs who stand up for them, they can be noticed and their disadvantage can be changed, maybe for a moment they are like a portrait lit by a struck match, but soon As the matches go out, they disappear into the black again. Except for the short-term focus-style "being cared for", it basically doesn't help. Before and after, they are still ants that will not be found under the elephant's feet. There is no solution to these things. The development of human society is always like this, and the minority can only obey the majority. But I have a feeling: Wouldn't the majority of society act a little less authoritarian if they realized they were human like us? At least the jury won't be out of liking -- but fact -- to avoid another humiliation of a punk youth who has died at the wheel.
View more about Bomb City reviews
