Our Apologies For The Previous Post

Hello readers,

Here at the Carolina Review we strive for the highest standards of excellence. Therefore, I was as shocked as the rest of you that “Tik Tok” and “Bad Romance” have somehow occupied the two top spots on our playlist.

Rest assured, the person responsible for repeatedly playing these songs in our office will be hunted down, identified and to erase this great shame they have caused our publication they will be given a wakizashi and encouraged to commit seppuku like a disgraced samurai.

In place of the last list, I would like to invite you to browse the National Review’s list of the Top 100 Conservative Rock Songs of all time:

The Top 50 Conservative Rock Songs of All Time

The Next 50

PS – “Tik Tok”?! Seriously? “Tik Tok” is down there with “Wannabe,” “Surfin’ Bird,” “Your Body is a Wonderland,” “Crank Dat” and anything by the Dixie Chicks in competition for the title of Worst Song of All Time. I fear for the future of my generation…

23 thoughts on “Our Apologies For The Previous Post

  1. ___0_ Reply

    "Surfin' Bird" by the Trashmen (1963) is a great song. Also, the idea of "conservative rock songs" is pretty funny, especially when the artists performing them are queers, hippies, socialists and other distinctly non-conservative types. Are there any musicians of note who are truly conservative by CR standards?

      • ___0_

        I wouldn't call WFB a musician "of note," but I'll grant you one white supremacist concert pianist…. anyone else? Ted Nugent, maybe? I don't know if he's sufficiently pious to meet the rigorous standards here.

      • cwjones

        Someone or another will probably find fault with all these, but I submit for consideration:

        Neil Peart (of Rush)
        James Hetfield (of Metallica)
        Gene Simmons (of KISS)
        Alice Cooper

        As far as the National Review's list goes, I'm pretty sure they weren't listing songs BY conservatives, but rather songs that expressed conservative sentiments.

      • ___0_

        WFB was an ardent promoter of white supremacy during the civil rights movement and the campaign against apartheid in South Africa. As far as I know he never admitted to being wrong about either. As late as 1989 he stood by the white supremacist sentiment expressed in his 1957 National Review editorial "Why the South Must Prevail."

      • ___0_

        It's nice to hear that he did finally express a bit of regret for opposing the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but it doesn't change the fact that for much of his life he used his position as a public figure to advocate for white supremacy.

      • ___0_

        Can you point out the constitutional argument here? I'm having trouble finding it. "The central question that emerges… is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not prevail numerically? The sobering answer is Yes – the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race. It is not easy, and it is unpleasant, to adduce statistics evidencing the cultural superiority of White over Negro: but it is a fact that obtrudes, one that cannot be hidden by ever-so-busy egalitarians and anthropologists."

      • ___0_

        …an unsigned editorial that is widely acknowledged as being Buckley's. The bloomberg.com link above only notes that he expressed mild regret for opposing the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Buckley and the National Review were apologists for white supremacy in South Africa well into the 80s, decades after publishing "Why The South Must Prevail." Can you point out where exactly he recanted and apologized for those decades as a vigorous and widely read promoter of such an amoral stance? It probably won't change my opinion of him as the worst kind of scumbag, but maybe we'll all learn something.

Leave a Reply