Sleep of Reason - Mark Springer/Neil Tennant/Sacconi String Quartet

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Neil Tennant: It often feels like we're living in an era dominated by monsters with their grotesque egos hollering through social media, unfiltered and untruthful, leaving a trail of wreckage behind them.

Ugh. Here we go again.

I'll still get this release, obviously, but knowing Neil's contribution extends only to the first quarter (i.e. Side A) of the release, and that he seems to be back in "Guardian supremacy mode" (for want of a better phrase) as he was during Agenda and on the David Gilmour collab, my interest has been lessened. Definitely CD only this time around for me.



Retro.

[Patrick Bateman]

Ugh. Here we go again.

I'll still get this release, obviously, but knowing Neil's contribution extends only to the first quarter (i.e. Side A) of the release, and that he seems to be back in "Guardian supremacy mode" (for want of a better phrase) as he was during Agenda and on the David Gilmour collab, my interest has been lessened. Definitely CD only this time around for me.



Retro.

I can't imagine who Neil is referring to. The problem with Neil and Western liberals like him is that they oversimplify things. In their world Trump, Musk et al. are the bogeyman and anyone opposed to them must be okay. They're all c***s, Neil.

[Alphonse]

Ugh. Here we go again.

I'll still get this release, obviously, but knowing Neil's contribution extends only to the first quarter (i.e. Side A) of the release, and that he seems to be back in "Guardian supremacy mode" (for want of a better phrase) as he was during Agenda and on the David Gilmour collab, my interest has been lessened. Definitely CD only this time around for me.



Retro.

I can't imagine who Neil is referring to. The problem with Neil and Western liberals like him is that they oversimplify things. In their world Trump, Musk et al. are the bogeyman and anyone opposed to them must be okay. They're all c***s, Neil.

Who is oversimplifying what?

[jasonjohn]

I can't imagine who Neil is referring to. The problem with Neil and Western liberals like him is that they oversimplify things. In their world Trump, Musk et al. are the bogeyman and anyone opposed to them must be okay. They're all c***s, Neil.

Exactly, I much prefer oversimplification of entire races and countries. Much easier for my tiny brain to comprehend.

[NotInvisible]

The problem with Neil and Western liberals like him is that they oversimplify things. In their world Trump, Musk et al. are the bogeyman and anyone opposed to them must be okay. They're all c***s, Neil.

Imagine being so smooth-brained that you actually believe “both sides are the same” and can’t see that Trump and Musk are objectively bad people.

[Alphonse]

Imagine being so smooth-brained that you actually believe “both sides are the same” and can’t see that Trump and Musk are objectively bad people.

(That is an oversimplification too...)

[Patrick Bateman]

Imagine being so smooth-brained that you actually believe “both sides are the same” and can’t see that Trump and Musk are objectively bad people.

Did I say they weren't?

[NotInvisible]

Imagine being so smooth-brained that you actually believe “both sides are the same” and can’t see that Trump and Musk are objectively bad people.

(That is an oversimplification too...)

No, it really isn’t. Both sides aren’t the same; a Harris administration wouldn’t be enacting Project 2025. Trump and Musk are objectively hurting people and damaging the US.

[NotInvisible]

Imagine being so smooth-brained that you actually believe “both sides are the same” and can’t see that Trump and Musk are objectively bad people.

Did I say they weren't?

You described Neil thinking of them as bogeymen. They’re not; they’re actually doing material harm to real people, and he’s right to critique them.

[Spittingcat]

Trump, Musk, Putin… a great bunch of lads, I won’t have a word said against them.

[Patrick Bateman]

You described Neil thinking of them as bogeymen. They’re not; they’re actually doing material harm to real people, and he’s right to critique them.

To liberals like Neil, they are bogeymen, responsible for all the ills in the world, unlike the sensible centrist globalists we should all vote for.

[jasonjohn]

To liberals like Neil, they are bogeymen, responsible for all the ills in the world, unlike the sensible centrist globalists we should all vote for.

OK, to ethically be able to sleep at night, and put money where your mouth is - you really need to swap all your PSB vinyls for Kid Rock.

Not a great place here if you believe they are boogeymen responsible for all the ills of the world.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Not a great place here if you believe they are boogeymen responsible for all the ills of the world.

Does this mean that if Elon, DOGE and Big Balls expose wanton corruption amongst government and the "sensible centrist globalists" that we're not allowed to like Pet Shop Boys any more?



Retro.

[jasonjohn]

Does this mean that if Elon, DOGE and Big Balls expose wanton corruption amongst government and the "sensible centrist globalists" that we're not allowed to like Pet Shop Boys any more?

You mean Elon who gives a platform to people identifying as Nazis and known sex slavers?

You mean Elon who is indiscriminately decimating the FBI, department of education, and other public services under the umbrella of weeding out a couple of trans people?

Yes. If you believe liberals like Neil Tennant are boogeyman and responsible for the ills of the world, then absolutely - cancel them, have the PSB shut down, report them to the new DOGE world order, try to get a book burning going, an LP burning of all the woke PSB albums.

No point you not going all in. Do it.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Jason,

No one called Neil the boogeyman or blames him for the ills of the world. I think you read Patrick's comment wrong, and in doing so, that led to you misconstrue mine.

I'm talking about inclusivity. If the "Guardian" world view that Neil ascribes to comes to be demonstrated as objectively wrong or flawed somehow, or if the USAID/NGO-network is exposed as a giant racketeering or money-laundering operation (let alone Ukraine), is everyone subsequently excluded from Pet Shop Boys music?

I mean, it might mean that certain tracks (e.g. Give Stupidity A Chance) age worse than others, but I see no grounds or basis for exclusion. We are all still allowed to like Pet Shop Boys in that circumstance, even if evolving facts threaten Neil's current preference for globalism (as espoused via his lyrics and public commentary), surely.

I'm not gay, for example, but that doesn't exclude me from enjoying and appreciating Pet Shop Boys, and no one has ever said it does. I'm surprised that "current political alignment" would suddenly lead to exclusion in the way you describe when "sexual alignment" never did.

Retro.