Probably an unpopular opinion (since I have never heard any other socialist voicing a similar one) but - No.
A band founded by a man who fled East Germany into the West, that made money off of an accident that killed half a hundred people by naming themselves after it, that made use of nazi aesthetics until they were called out for it and had to backpedal releasing a vaguely leftist song, and that has profited off of real cases of r*pe by writing songs about them, is not and will never be "based", no matter how many times they hide under the symbols of the GDR.
I am not saying they don't; they have a few songs that I must admit I too find catchy, even under the name of Rammstein. What I'm saying is that they are not the "based and commiepilled" people some think and are, instead, rather a terrible bunch.
Richard Kruspe fled from East to West Berlin, and he himself explained the event in an interview with Loudwire. If you think it was justified (or even if the event is true, if you are that skeptic) it's up to you, but that it happened is undeniable.
Rammstein named itself after the Ramstein air show disaster of 1988, in which two planes crashed and ended up killing 67 spectators. In fact, and if there is even a trace of doubt left, the band was first named "Rammstein-Flugschau", which translates to "Rammstein Air Show". I am the kind of person who thinks no decent socialist would ever name a business venture after such an event, but that depends on how high (or low) you set your bar.
Rammstein has been making use of nazi imagery since their cover of Depeche Mode's "Stripped", in which they use footage from the 1938 German film "Olympia", filmed by nazi propagandist Leni Riefenstahl. After the accusations began coming in they saw themselves forced 3 years later to release "Links 2 3 4", a song with vague references to the left that has, unfortunately, managed to convince many (even principled socialists) that they are actual left-wing musicians who have done no wrong.
The most vile of them all in my opinion: "Wiener Blut", a song from the album Liebe ist für alle da. The whole song is about the Fritzl case. There's a wikipedia page explaining the whole deal that I am not even going to link. Feel free to google it yourself, although I would recommend you to only do that in a moment in which you feel like ruining the rest of your day. This basically ends with the same conclusion I finish point 2 with, although with a much worse example.
At the end of the day, Rammstein is a band that, as most of them, exists with the sole purpose of generating money, in this case by attracting attention and outrage by breaking taboos (completely disregarding any thought of why some of those may exist in the first place), even if such causes the further spread of human suffering, which only ends the moment someone touches their wallet. Not to say that a socialist cannot play music and make money with it, but any serious one would know there are some things that are off-bounds if one takes their principles seriously.
Ugh. People have been telling me I need to check out Rammstein. Looks like I won't. (I had a friend in school was into that kind of "shock-jock music with vaguely fascist aesthetics" thing, and it was the most obnoxious shit ever).
I mean Ramstein air base is a US military base on German soil, and the disaster was at an event celebrating war machines.
The US military initially didn't allow German emergency services into the base to help. Ambulances and fire trucks were held at the gate for an hour while German civilians burned and died.
The show is a testament to Western military's disregard for human life. They gathered civilians to celebrate military might, and were more concerned with maintaining security against their own allies than protecting the lives of the people that air base ostensibly exists to protect.
It would be gauche to call the event 'based', but an event that deserves to be remembered. And the plain fact of the matter is, if Rammstein weren't called Rammstein, the Ramstein Air Disaster would not have persisted in public memory for as long as it has.
I'm unsure Rammstein's intentions were to memorialize the event in the light you propose. The band is after all part (and greatest example) of the Neue Deutsche Härte, which has as a big part of its identity to break taboos and singing about shocking topics in very graphic ways. It's just shock value, and one they've been very famous for until they began toning it down in later years with more recent releases, following the tendency of what is or not acceptable even outside the mainstream morality.
You've clearly got a strong opinion on them, and I don't expect to change it. But I do want to point out that most of the aspersions you cast on them are based on subjectively interpreting their intentions as cynical.
We can disagree about their intentions until the heat death of the universe. Their material effect remains the same.
I have made my labor of citing sources for my claims, so while my interpretations of certain facts are indeed cynical (why would a communist not navigate with cynicism bourgeois society and the media arising from it?), the facts behind them are not deniable. Per example: Rammstein has made use of nazi imagery by using footage from the same director that filmed "Triumph of the Will", and that is true no matter how you look at it. If you think that they were justified on it, then that is a different topic.
This being said, I invite you to think: would you agree to find these actions justifiable if they did not have the Rammstein brand over them, coming instead from a more modern band?
If using Leni Riefenstahl's footage is condemnable, are you also going to condemn them for wearing nazi uniforms in their videos, as well as everyone else who's been involved in a film that uses nazi imagery?
Obviously there's contextual nuance involved, and you're steamrolling over it with that question. You haven't even mentioned the context in which Riefenstahl's footage was used.
The irony is that people who defend Triumph Of The Will say that it should be judged separate from the political context in which it was created.
Are Rammstein secretly based?
Probably an unpopular opinion (since I have never heard any other socialist voicing a similar one) but - No.
A band founded by a man who fled East Germany into the West, that made money off of an accident that killed half a hundred people by naming themselves after it, that made use of nazi aesthetics until they were called out for it and had to backpedal releasing a vaguely leftist song, and that has profited off of real cases of r*pe by writing songs about them, is not and will never be "based", no matter how many times they hide under the symbols of the GDR.
When half of Rammstein was Feeling B they had some decent songs tho, I really liked "I'm looking for the GDR"
I am not saying they don't; they have a few songs that I must admit I too find catchy, even under the name of Rammstein. What I'm saying is that they are not the "based and commiepilled" people some think and are, instead, rather a terrible bunch.
Source?/gen
Of which claims do you need one?
Edit: Actually nevermind, I will cite them all:
Richard Kruspe fled from East to West Berlin, and he himself explained the event in an interview with Loudwire. If you think it was justified (or even if the event is true, if you are that skeptic) it's up to you, but that it happened is undeniable.
Rammstein named itself after the Ramstein air show disaster of 1988, in which two planes crashed and ended up killing 67 spectators. In fact, and if there is even a trace of doubt left, the band was first named "Rammstein-Flugschau", which translates to "Rammstein Air Show". I am the kind of person who thinks no decent socialist would ever name a business venture after such an event, but that depends on how high (or low) you set your bar.
Rammstein has been making use of nazi imagery since their cover of Depeche Mode's "Stripped", in which they use footage from the 1938 German film "Olympia", filmed by nazi propagandist Leni Riefenstahl. After the accusations began coming in they saw themselves forced 3 years later to release "Links 2 3 4", a song with vague references to the left that has, unfortunately, managed to convince many (even principled socialists) that they are actual left-wing musicians who have done no wrong.
The most vile of them all in my opinion: "Wiener Blut", a song from the album Liebe ist für alle da. The whole song is about the Fritzl case. There's a wikipedia page explaining the whole deal that I am not even going to link. Feel free to google it yourself, although I would recommend you to only do that in a moment in which you feel like ruining the rest of your day. This basically ends with the same conclusion I finish point 2 with, although with a much worse example.
At the end of the day, Rammstein is a band that, as most of them, exists with the sole purpose of generating money, in this case by attracting attention and outrage by breaking taboos (completely disregarding any thought of why some of those may exist in the first place), even if such causes the further spread of human suffering, which only ends the moment someone touches their wallet. Not to say that a socialist cannot play music and make money with it, but any serious one would know there are some things that are off-bounds if one takes their principles seriously.
Ugh. People have been telling me I need to check out Rammstein. Looks like I won't. (I had a friend in school was into that kind of "shock-jock music with vaguely fascist aesthetics" thing, and it was the most obnoxious shit ever).
You aren't missing much imo.
They should name themselves "Erfurt" instead, for the based german catastrophe.
The peak of human history, everything has gone downhill since.
I mean Ramstein air base is a US military base on German soil, and the disaster was at an event celebrating war machines.
The US military initially didn't allow German emergency services into the base to help. Ambulances and fire trucks were held at the gate for an hour while German civilians burned and died.
The show is a testament to Western military's disregard for human life. They gathered civilians to celebrate military might, and were more concerned with maintaining security against their own allies than protecting the lives of the people that air base ostensibly exists to protect.
It would be gauche to call the event 'based', but an event that deserves to be remembered. And the plain fact of the matter is, if Rammstein weren't called Rammstein, the Ramstein Air Disaster would not have persisted in public memory for as long as it has.
I'm unsure Rammstein's intentions were to memorialize the event in the light you propose. The band is after all part (and greatest example) of the Neue Deutsche Härte, which has as a big part of its identity to break taboos and singing about shocking topics in very graphic ways. It's just shock value, and one they've been very famous for until they began toning it down in later years with more recent releases, following the tendency of what is or not acceptable even outside the mainstream morality.
You've clearly got a strong opinion on them, and I don't expect to change it. But I do want to point out that most of the aspersions you cast on them are based on subjectively interpreting their intentions as cynical.
We can disagree about their intentions until the heat death of the universe. Their material effect remains the same.
I have made my labor of citing sources for my claims, so while my interpretations of certain facts are indeed cynical (why would a communist not navigate with cynicism bourgeois society and the media arising from it?), the facts behind them are not deniable. Per example: Rammstein has made use of nazi imagery by using footage from the same director that filmed "Triumph of the Will", and that is true no matter how you look at it. If you think that they were justified on it, then that is a different topic. This being said, I invite you to think: would you agree to find these actions justifiable if they did not have the Rammstein brand over them, coming instead from a more modern band?
If using Leni Riefenstahl's footage is condemnable, are you also going to condemn them for wearing nazi uniforms in their videos, as well as everyone else who's been involved in a film that uses nazi imagery?
Obviously there's contextual nuance involved, and you're steamrolling over it with that question. You haven't even mentioned the context in which Riefenstahl's footage was used.
The irony is that people who defend Triumph Of The Will say that it should be judged separate from the political context in which it was created.
There's no need to dig that deep into it. Till Lindemann himself recognised it was a provocation that they took too far.