He is, he can only make it to Dublin from Minneapolis nonstop in his personal Gulfstream GIII....
Posted on 09/12/2012 11:28:13 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Folk rock legend Bob Dylan has some strong words about America that many of his compatriots may not want to hear: He says the stigma of slavery ruined America and he doubts whether the country can get rid of the shame because it was “founded on the backs of slaves.”
Dylan spoke to Rolling Stone for a cover story that coincides with the release of his 35th studio album, “Tempest.” Dylan has long been an outspoken critic of American culture and its inherent inequalities, particularly during the 1960s when his songs “Blowin’ in the Wind” and “The Times They Are a-Changin’” voiced his generation’s support for civil rights and anger at the Vietnam War.
In his interview with Rolling Stone, Dylan, who has won just about every music and songwriting award on the planet, seems intent not so much on attacking America for its racist history but observing that racism has long been holding the country back.
“People (are) at each other’s throats just because they are of a different color,” he said. “It will hold any nation back.”
A 71-year-old man born in Minnesota at a time when blacks in many parts of the country couldn’t eat in white restaurants or use white water fountains, Dylan has seen a great deal of America’s progress and evolution during the past century—all the way to the election of the first black president. But clearly he has not seen enough progress. And he thinks it all goes back to the country’s founding.
He tells Rolling Stone that blacks know that some whites “didn’t want to give up slavery.” Only after a civil war cleaved the nation in two did slavery come to a reluctant end—after more than 600,000 Americans (including 260,000 Southerners) died in a war that started because the South wanted to preserve the institution.
“If slavery had been given up in a more peaceful way, America would be far ahead today,” Dylan observes.
When the magazine asked if the election of President Obama was helping to bring about a change, Dylan says: “I don’t have any opinion on that. You have to change your heart if you want to change.”
The magazine’s new issue hits newsstands Friday.
Someone should tell Bob Dyaln that the glorious countries where they killed our ambassadors that slavery is still LEGAL in those great “spring” countries....
From the Weekly Standard.
“And indeed, any scrutiny of the record would show that he has never endorsed a political candidate (although some political candidates have endorsed him). The closest he has ever come would be the statement in his memoir, Chronicles, that his “favorite politician” circa 1961 was Barry Goldwater.”
He is, he can only make it to Dublin from Minneapolis nonstop in his personal Gulfstream GIII....
something like that anyways.
FIrst od all, it's a blog and all the quotefrom the RS interview is what AP reported this morning. I read the AP story, and I read all of the blog just to see if they had any more.
K?
Obama’s election has only served to inflame already intense black racism, b/c every time the Marxist thug is criticized, blacks are told that it proves that WHITE racism is still alive and well. It is shocking the near totality of black trust for the punk who is leading us, and THEM, down the sewer. Bob
As far as Vietnam, you are wrong.
This is from The Weekly Standard.
It’s an interesting paradox. Looking at the record, Vietnam should have been the wedge that forced the left to reject Dylan as a matter of dogma, because he failed to give them anything that they demanded from him, and actually gave them the opposite of what they wanted.
Instead, the Vietnam war is the seemingly unbreakable link that ties Dylan to the left in the popular consciousness. Consider: Dylan wrote no songs about the Vietnam war during the 1960s. Zero. The songs Dylan wrote that antiwar protesters later seized upon (from Blowin’ in the Wind on down) were written when the Vietnam war was little more than a twinkle in John F. Kennedy’s eye.
A close study of those songs would also reveal, as Dylan himself has stated in so many words, that they are not “antiwar” songs, as such. Just as with all his best work, they are based upon an almost unerring sense of human nature and a remarkable ability to ask questions that provoke revealing answers in the listener.
Consider also: Dylan never spoke out against the Vietnam war in the 1960s. Not once. It was not for want of being asked. At a 1965 press conference in San Francisco he was asked if he would be participating in an anti-war protest later that day. He replied, “No, I’ll be busy tonight.” The tape shows that he was all but laughing while he said it.
With America’s name at a low-water mark in the world and in the minds of the protesters at home, Dylan recorded Nashville Skyline, an album of sweet country music that can also be heard as love songs to a simpler America, and one that was certainly very far from Dylan’s front door.
Despite the heat he took, he backed down not one bit. In an interview in Sing Out! magazine in 1968, Dylan was pressed on how any artist could be silent in the face of the war. Dylan talked about a painter friend of his who was in favor of the war, and said that he “could comprehend him.” Pressed further on how he could possibly share any values with such a person, Dylan responded:
I’ve known him a long time, he’s a gentleman and I admire him . . . Anyway, how do you know that I’m not, as you say, for the war?
The topic was dropped there.
Sometimes our idols turn out to be blithering dolts.
Do you think it was ever an option? 9 million versus 22 million and only one side industrialized? Really? And the Black population of both sides ready to fight for the North? I didn't know that people still entertained the possibility of southern victory. Thanks for sharing this.
Geez, this Atlanta Black Star, whatever that is, knows just how to provoke the worst here!
So Dylan can’t sing, you say? That’s an original thought.
Dylan is a lib? I thought we decided a while ago that he was a Conservative?!
I’m waiting to hear the opinion of Zamphir of Pan-pipe fame.
The south might have given up slavery peacefully if the north hadn’t made it an un-Constitutional issue over state’s rights. Dylan is no liberal but he’s no historian either.
Shouldn’t you be pinging the people that you are attacking?
Read post 68 from the Weekly Standard, and then remember that the left has convinced almost all of America that Bob Dylan was a leader of the anti-Vietnam war movement, active, vocal, the song writer of the movement, etc, etc.
It is clear that the media definitely, constantly frames Dylan inaccurately, regardless of what we find out his thoughts are in this interview, when it comes out.
Here is a link to a good article on Dylan, from a conservative perspective.
The article is from The Weekly Standard, but you have to read it from this blog, my original link was archived and hidden.
http://blogforcuba.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/09/what_dylan_is_n.html
Perhaps Zimmy is too much of a diplomat to tell us that it was slavery that gave us the ever resistant to change and improvement culture of Trayvon Martin, O.J. Simpson and Jesse Shakedown Jackson, among so many other similar cultural heroes of America.
Uneducated, too.
LOL
The fact that other countries figured out how to end slavery without a civil war does not work in our favor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.