This study provides the first extensive examination of Strummer’s politics and their influence, using a socialist realist framework. Strummer’s political significance stems from using music as a means to communicate radical ideals, which was shown in this study to have had significant influence. On this basis, it can be reasonably ventured he has been the most influential left-wing political musician in Western culture since the mid-1970s because his influence has breadth and depth in developing oppositional, including socialist, consciousness. This conclusion draws together the different threads of the previous chapters. What is noteworthy about this influence is that it has often been premised upon Strummer being perceived as more left wing than he actually was, highlighting that subjective judgements by followers were as important as what Strummer said and did.

This chapter examines what Strummer said about socialism, Marxism and revolution, both generally and in terms of the working class, unions, social movements and political parties. The significant changes in Strummer’s political perspective, where his radicalism dimmed and he moved towards humanism, are explored in Chapter 8. This chapter begins by examining what Strummer said about himself and his formative political influences. It concludes he was not a Marxist, and though his politics were complex in terms of their means and ends, he is best characterised as a social democrat in terms of ends.

There are various challenges that studying Strummer presents. The most obvious is to avoid conflating The Clash with Strummer and, to a lesser extent, Strummer with The Clash. The latter, which is less problematic, sees the impact of The Clash, as a band with members other than Strummer, attributed to Strummer. The former, which is the more problematic, sees Strummer’s impact, especially through his lyrics, attributed to The Clash. But given the dominant division of labour between Joe Strummer and Mick Jones, these conflations are less problematic than they may first seem, because Strummer was the principal lyricist, spokesperson, singer and performance frontperson. However, other challenges come from Strummer himself in terms of his complexity, contradictions and hyperbole. This chapter also lays out the primary and secondary data-gathering methods used.

In 1988, Strummer set out to ‘Rock Against the Rich’. The occasion was a twenty-three date British tour which he part-funded and fully fronted on behalf of London Class War, an anarchist group, with his new band, Latino Rockabilly War. Along with playing other benefit gigs that year, 1988 was the most prolonged and intense period of Strummer’s political activity. Yet it stood at a particular point in Strummer’s political trajectory, between the end of The Clash in early 1986 and the beginning of his so-called ‘wilderness years’ at the end of 1989. Since mid-1983, Strummer had become ever more politically outspoken. Yet when Strummer struck out on this, his most radical and sustained political intervention, he faced a much-diminished audience standing on a much-diminished platform because his star had waned. Some believed his time had passed, being ‘yesterday’s man’. This was even though he believed he still had something to say and could still make a contribution towards achieving social justice. But this most sustained political intervention made Strummer neither an activist nor an initiator of action.

This chapter examines unconsidered aspects of the period from Mick Jones’s last performance with The Clash in mid-1983 to the implosion of The Clash in late 1985/early 1986. This was the period of Strummer’s ‘rebel rock’. The chapter also examines a number of other facets such as Strummer’s views on women, his propensity for violence and his support for environmentalism. The rationale for this is Strummer’s Us festival monologue its opening gambit and continuation throughout the set at Jones’s last performance provided one of the most wide-ranging spoken manifestos Strummer would ever make.

The criteria for assessing Strummer’s influence are its depth and breadth across space and time. In other words, where, when and for how long and in what manner did he influence people? Was his influence, for example, deep-seated and long-lasting or was it short and superficial whether, for instance, in Britain or the US and in what time period did this occur? And in what ways did Strummer change people’s attitudes and behaviours? These questions concern the qualitative and quantitative aspects without for the moment examining the ‘why’ and ‘how’ questions, which are better suited to be answered through analysis of the testimonies from followers. Consequently, this chapter looks at the evidence available from secondary sources to map the extent and nature of Strummer’s influence. First, it looks at what Strummer said about his own influence in general and specific terms. Then it considers what others said about his influence on themselves and others, before moving on to look at perceptions of heroism and prophecy. Finally, the small handful of studies of Strummer/Clash followers are assessed. Given this study’s socialist realist framework, each ‘where’, ‘when’ and ‘how’ question also pertains to advancing the cause of socialism.

Many have characterised Strummer as some kind of activist. There is no doubt Strummer saw music as a way to advance left-wing politics but that did not make him an activist, even if he advocated individuals should become politically active and activists themselves. Consequently, these characterisations are wrong. By showing what Strummer was not, this chapter demonstrates what he was namely an advocate and leader. So the locus for identifying and understanding Strummer’s influence is to be primarily found in what he said the words he spoke in his lyrics, interviews and on-stage pronouncements and not in what he did, because he was not an activist prosecuting his politics by turning words into deeds. Activists seek to generate countervailing power through their actions. Chapters 8 and 9 examine the other side of this equation his followers.

Strummer has universally and unanimously been characterised as being of the left. This is not disputed even though his politics changed significantly in his last two decades, with this being seldom studied. However, thereafter there is little clarity about what type of left politics Strummer held. Almost all would agree he was a ‘rebel’. This appellation was widely used both of him and by him. However, that does not take us very far in understanding his politics because rebellion is, quintessentially, against something and takes many different forms from many different perspectives. To be said to be radical is more illuminating as this is to be not only against something but also to be for something. That said, those alternatives could be right or left wing because radicalism, while tackling the fundamental nature of a situation, does not presuppose a leftward direction. So, it is fortunate the terms used to describe Strummer’s politics are numerous, over and above being a ‘rebel’ and ‘radical’, such as anti-capitalist, Marxist, socialist and revolutionary. But problems of definition, periodisation and evidence exist in these characterisations. This chapter examines these characterisations as well as the comments of his critics. Strummer’s response is then examined, along with the nature of his lyric writing, on which most of the characterisations are based.

A crumbling Victorian town, Bradford suffered a post-industrial meltdown familiar to many of its northern neighbours. But its multi-racial makeup helped create a melting pot that nurtured a distinct post-punk scene, including bands such as New Model Army and Southern Death Cult. New Model Army in particular forged their own path and remain active to this day, producing moody, passionate songs that echo the sounds of moors and mill towns.

The Slovenian band Laibach have been pushing musical and political boundaries since their formation in 1980. Originating in industrial music, the band pushes parody to extremes in order to satirise totalitarianism, hypocrisy and complacency. Operating more like a collective of sonic situationists than a conventional musical group, they continue to provide a masterclass in subverting the mainstream.