As I stated in my original post, I am merely trying to get across that the influence of metal ( which has no real ideology except basic rock n roll ethos) was negative to Anarchist punk...which although had a borrowed ideology....at least had one.
My point still stands....metal is moronic. Always has been....and unfortunately, always will be.
I think we're saying the same thing here, the two groups. You suffer a bit from anti-metal bigotry, but we'd be lying if we said that most metal had ideology. But it's important to realize that metal had an underground, too. Black Sabbath was not apolitical, nor without ideology, although their drug habits led them to Christ and adulterated it around "Master of Reality" (all cokeheads and former porn stars discover Bibles in rehab). But what about NWOBHM?
Look at what happened in metal... 1970 was the first Black Sabbath album. Within a few years, there were imitators. So NWOBHM happened. Five years later, NWOBHM + Discharge created speed, death and black metal.
What's good about metal is that it doesn't try to have an activist ideology. It is more artistic and less static and so is more flexible over the years. Metal's ideology is anti-social: it believes the crowd is wrong, it believes reality is real, and that most people are delusional. It is anti-society but pro-experience and as a result is both anarchistic and fascistic.
Like most genres, though, there is no certification program (except ANUS). So for every band that gets it there are fifteen Bon Jovis and Carpathian Forests, and their ideology is beer + tits. That's the rock influence. Both metal and punk suffer from having descended from, in the mainstream view, pop music.
I think you have to keep an open mind about the best of the genre and not blame it for the entropy that results when the crowd floods in and wants a simpler, more convenient ideology.
I could easily blame the Dead Kennedys for turning punk into paint-by-numbers and scream at bands like Bad Religion for turning it into a rebellion trend. The message that I get from this history is that any genre that wishes to survive will have to be artistic, adaptable, and stay ahead of its imitators.
Even progressive rock got imitated. We don't have many of these bands any more, since they were terrible, but there were a whole string of Opeth-style Yes clones in the late 1970s.
Some genres produce nothing but junk. What was disco's ideology?
metal is just fantasy for little boys.....especially black metal.
Here we disagree: you are confusing ideology with dogma. Metal chooses a poetic path, while punk chose a political one. The poetic path instills philosophy and the political path creates partisanship and dogma. Would anarchy work? No. Would anarchy solve our problems? No. What does a Romanticist ethic create? A sense of values that can be applied to any ideology, as conveyed through an experience that illustrates itself. It's more convincing, more lasting, and less like running our brains through a machine which tells us what to say.
Black metal if anything is something you should champion, as the presellout bands were completely opposed to the beer + tits ideology (excepting Impaled Nazarene, who were basically punkers).