Jazz concert censored!

[jlhoots]

It's probably not "censorship" when a safety issue is involved.

[Steve Reynolds]

What if a musician had clearly racist views of African Americans analogous to Atzmon's extreme views on Jews?

Any doubt he wouldn't have a venue to play in? In Manchester or anywhere else?

[seeline]

I like his playing, but he clearly has become much more extreme over the past 8-10 years re. his views and I cannot, in all good conscience, accept - let alone support - them. Even many pro-Palestinian activists disavow him now. Example: http://socialistworker.org/2010/07/15/no-place-for-atzmon-at-sw

Aside from that, I don't think that getting his concert cancelled was the best way to go about things, but I can understand the sentiments on both sides.

Edited March 9, 2015 by seeline

[GA Russell]

Not too long ago there was an op/ed in the WSJ which I tore out to read later but haven't yet, about a concept called "the heckler's veto."

The idea was much like this case.

Here it is, from Dec. 29, behind a paywall.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/barry-a-fisher-free-speechs-shrinking-circle-of-friends-

There was a 1949 US Supreme Court case called Terminiello v. Chicago which said that the police have the duty to protect the speaker from the protesters.

It's probably not "censorship" when a safety issue is involved.

jlh, strictly speaking censorship occurs when it is the government which is acting.

I gather that since the Terminiello decision places the burden on the police to ensure the safety, in the US the situation would indeed be considered censorship.

[Larry Kart]

Also, as I tried to explain in that post, I believe that Atzmon, a musician of talent, is conflating his musical gifts with his batshit Holocaust denial views in an attempt to lend legitimacy to those views.

This conflation seems fundamental to your argument but I can't actually see any evidence that you preesnt to support this conflation, unless I've missed something upthread.

and the interviews then tend to be about the supposed paradox, or whatever one calls it, between 1) and 2). Also, these interviews typically allowing Atzmon a good deal of room to expound on his arguably extreme views.

Really so? Can you link to such articles? I only ask as I've read many articles about Atzmon over the years in the UK music press and rarely are the two elements of his life given equal measure. In the music interviews there may be passing reference to his political activism but not to my knowledge to the detail of his beliefs. I'd go as far to say that anyone who'd read the music press in UK about him would be surprised by depth his political activism.

Such a lack of explicit conflation may well be editorial decisions of the publications not wanting to have their content politicised. It may be that Atzmon doesn't expouse his more extreme views in these interviews precisely to prevent potential listeners being turned off by such unpalatable views

Let's pause a moment in this discussion to hear some music:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0xzTTlX_a4

lovely playing.........

Some more of Atzmon's greatest hits (sorry, but I can't find one of the interviews in the general press that gives Atzmon the musician a chance to go on about his "views" because he is a talented musician, but I'm pretty sure I've seen some):

http://www.sott.net/...th-Gilad-Atzmon

Robert Faurrison who is sympathetically to say the least interviewed by Atzmon in the long clip linked to above, is among the world’s most prominent Holocaust deniers.

[mjazzg]

Also, as I tried to explain in that post, I believe that Atzmon, a musician of talent, is conflating his musical gifts with his batshit Holocaust denial views in an attempt to lend legitimacy to those views.

This conflation seems fundamental to your argument but I can't actually see any evidence that you preesnt to support this conflation, unless I've missed something upthread.

and the interviews then tend to be about the supposed paradox, or whatever one calls it, between 1) and 2). Also, these interviews typically allowing Atzmon a good deal of room to expound on his arguably extreme views.

Really so? Can you link to such articles? I only ask as I've read many articles about Atzmon over the years in the UK music press and rarely are the two elements of his life given equal measure. In the music interviews there may be passing reference to his political activism but not to my knowledge to the detail of his beliefs. I'd go as far to say that anyone who'd read the music press in UK about him would be surprised by depth his political activism.

Such a lack of explicit conflation may well be editorial decisions of the publications not wanting to have their content politicised. It may be that Atzmon doesn't expouse his more extreme views in these interviews precisely to prevent potential listeners being turned off by such unpalatable views

Let's pause a moment in this discussion to hear some music:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0xzTTlX_a4

lovely playing.........

Some more of Atzmon's greatest hits (sorry, but I can't find one of the interviews in the general press that gives Atzmon the musician a chance to go on about his "views" because he is a talented musician, but I'm pretty sure I've seen some):

http://www.sott.net/...th-Gilad-Atzmon

Robert Faurrison who is sympathetically to say the least interviewed by Atzmon in the long clip linked to above, is among the world’s most prominent Holocaust deniers.

There's little doubting his unsavoury and despicable views and this thread has done good service in exposing them.

My point was your claim of conflation and thus using his musical career to directly promote his political ideas which I'm still not convinced has happened, at least here in UK

[seeline]

mjazzg, if you look at his website, you'll see that Atzmon mixes the two rather freely. he seems to have gone from having strong opinions to really horrible views over the past decade.

perhaps the UK press has been deliberately avoiding any discussion of those views because nobody wants to start a firestorm?

Edited March 9, 2015 by seeline

[mjazzg]

seeline, I agree that his website gives ready access to his "thoughts" as he tags them. I also agree with your perception of the change to extremity in his views (but again maybe that's a matter of access).

I actually wonder how much the folk that have interviewed him in the UK music press have researched his non-musical opinions but I can also see your point that they may have chosen not to - a point I made about editorial decisions in an earlier post.

Of course there may be examples where they have called him to account but I've not read them. I can't claim to have read the entire UK music press output of the last ten years, despite what my partner says

Edited March 9, 2015 by mjazzg

[JSngry]

This is why I only listen to dead people.

[GA Russell]

This is why I only listen to dead people.

Jim, I'm reminded of something from 30 years ago. At that time, I worked for McCrory Variety Stores.

You may recall the Roy Rogers restaurant chain, which at that time was owned by Marriott. About 1983, Roy caused a controversy by saying that he was against gun control. The pro-gun control people said that they would boycott the restaurants.

My boss said that that is why you should only name a business after someone who is dead. Whatever that dead person did, he has stopped doing anything more, and there won't be any future surprises.

I suppose that it is possible that some secret will be unearthed, but I think that my boss was right.

(I also recall Col. Sanders criticizing the KFC gravy after he had sold the company to Pepsi. He said that it was like wallpaper paste!)