Springsteen has accounted for his motives by publishing a political pamphlet in New York Times on the 5th of August. It is the moderation that gives the voice of Springsteen political weight, and in fact it appears that he approved of the war in Afghanistan although he is definetely an adversary of the Iraq war. Moreover, he doesn't place himself in an opposition so radical that it would let the Republicans monopolize the appeal to Christian and national values. On the contrary Springsteen writes, that "It is through the truthful exercising of the best of human qualities - respect for others, honesty about ourselves, faith in our ideals - that we come to life in God's eyes". And his writing ends in the same high-flown style: "Our American government has strayed too far from American values. It is time to move forward. The country we carry in our hearts is waiting". In such phrases you hear a man, who would hardly act in the role of an instigator if he didn't feel compelled to do so. Springsteen regards the approaching election as the most decisive in his lifetime, and as it says at the entrance to his homepage: "I felt like I couldn't have written the music I've written and been onstage singing about the things that I've sung about for the past 25 years and not take part in this particular election".
Springsteen's decision has its price, which he can hardly have been ignorant about - for there was a prelude to the recent developments four years ago. At that time policemen in New York had mistakenly killed an unarmed, black man with 41 shots (!), and Springsteen reacted with a both deeply touching and mordantly satirical song about, how you can get killed just for living in your American Skin. These words got a whole new meaning after September 11 2001 - but indeed, so did the policeforce of New York! Anyhow, now the strange thing happened, that at some concerts you could suddenly hear booing when Springsteen sang American Skin, and on his homepage a comprehensive discussion developed about, whether you can really go in for his music if you are right-wing. A recurrent point in many contributions to this debate was, that the ethical implications in the music may favour Democratic views but don't nessecarily exclude Republican. Further, the Republican fans hit on the autonomy of art in relation to partisan politics, and in this they believed - fairly justified - to stand in silent agreement with Springsteen himself.
It is this agreement that Springsteen has now broken, and the reactions have been vehement. In the course of a few days the news of his envolvement in the presidential election had resulted in thousends of contributions on his homepage, and many of them has the character of Republican fans solemnly swearing never again to support his music. From an economic point of view the wealthy rock star can naturally remain calm about the situation. But when mature people, of which one for example remembers to have attended more than twenty of Springsteen's concerts, now drop him, it is not just money that is at stake.
*Continue to the third page of this article