AUS-ROTTEN
“The System Works For Them” LP
-FINALLY RE-ISSUED AFTER 20 YEARS!-
Originally pressed in 1996 PROFANE EXISTENCE is bringing this quintessential anarcho punk masterpiece back in circulation.
In 1996 AUS-ROTTEN released their first LP “The System Works For Them” on an unsuspecting punk scene. It spread like wildfire in a pre internet era within a genre that mostly depended on tape trading. (at least is was pre internet for us penniless punks) “The System Works For Them” was the perfect mix of anger and intelligence that the scene needed at the time (and still does today). It was like a wake up call that opened the eyes and ears to many punks the world over. The messages where crystal clear and most us were hooked as soon as the beginning shouts of “Boycott” bellowed over the speakers. I don’t believe any of us ever expected their message to resonate so well within the scene, but even more surprising is how the songs are just as relevant today as on they the day they were written. Which is why PROFANE EXISTENCE has decided to repress this record. We feel that that messages that AUS-ROTTEN brought to the table are to powerful to ignore. We feel that this LP is important and therefore should be highly available and priced affordably.
PROFANE EXISTENCE has worked out every last detail of this release with the members of AUS-ROTTEN whom have been involved from step one. All tracks have been re-masted by Jay Matherson at the Jamroom studios. To be 100% honest we didn’t want to do a complete re-master of what we already considered a good recording. However when we opened the tracks on protools we noticed a few balance issues that required fixing. These fixes resulted in a tremendous upgrade to the overall quality of the tracks. We painstakingly scanned, puzzled, and photoshopped the original artwork to make sure that it was as close to authentic as it could possible be. We then went for broke by pressing in three different vinyl color combinations! Overall to say that we are pumped to release this would be an understatement, we are absolutely ecstatic to bring you this LP on PROFANE EXISTENCE!
To top this all off we worked with AUS-ROTTEN vocalist Dave Trenga on redrawing the classic “What Good Is Money, When There Is No One Left To Buy” design for a T-Shirt to concede with the albums release. This is a fresh take on an old image to create a new and original design.
Vinyl options are…
1. Standard black vinyl
2. “The Battlefield is Still Red” Bloodsplatter vinyl.
3. See through “Smoke”. – Available at SKULLFEST only
ORDER HERE- http://profaneexistence.storenvy.com
ALL PREORDERS WILL BE SHIPPED OUT BY AUGUST 19TH
Great article! First, I’d like to commend you on a well written response to the definition of “punk” as put forth by the likes of Ozzi. Second, to clarify matters there are some issues here I think you might be overlooking. While I agree that punk is not dead, you have to recognize the fact that punk is an ever-changing “genre” and “style” and what is “authentically” punk right now, to you (and myself), is not so to all people engaged with “punk.” Also, a big part of the reason punk has morphed into the definition of it that you align yourself with is because of the cultural appropriation of “punk” style(s) by the mainstream. (I’m assuming you’ve read Hebdige because of your safety pin reference.) You have to remember “punk” started with the Sex PIstols, and the Sex PIstols were initially a marketing scheme for a fetish shop. You don’t get more capitalist than that and they’re considered the godfathers of “punk” to many.
I also feel that, while you make a good case for punk not being spectacle, you’ve missed the heart of Debord’s argument about what spectacle is and what it does. Punk very much can be considered spectacular, and spectacle is not solely the domain of capitalist pigs. The spectacular does not have to be the shock and awe and spectacle of an overly produced pop concert. Safety pins are spectacular. Vegan, antifa, feminist punx are spectular… just in a different way and with their own agenda. This does not mean I’m condemning any of that. The problem with punk being so radically politicized now-a-days is that we’re as fractioned as the anarchists of old. I can appreciate all the arguments “punk” puts forth without necessarily participating or aligning myself with those perspectives. That’s what makes punk great. It isn’t “not giving a fuck” it’s actually giving two fucks and possibly opening peoples eyes to these issues in an anti-hegemonic way that makes punk special. When viewed in this light Miley Cyrus could be a little bit “punk” or at the very least her performance forced people to think about the issues raised as being “punk.” Not that I’m sticking up for her or her performance. But, the fact that her performance forced a large scale public discussion of issues such as race, gender, and sexuality led people to consider it in the realm of the only other phenomenon they associate that level of discomfort with… and that’s “punk. “
You indicate punk is “queers and people of color and womyn and everyone who refuses to assimilate or perpetuate oppression” and then suggest people listen to Bad Brains. Did they not perpetuate oppression with their attitudes towards and song(s) regarding homosexuality?
“If Miley Cyrus’ racist performances are punk, the the KKK is punk. And the KKK isn’t punk. Mainstream society is all about the white supremacy. Ain’t nothing punk about that. If Miley Cyrus not giving a fuck about what people think is punk, then Monsanto and the U.S. Military Industrial Complex are punk. I think its pretty obvious why not giving a fuck doesn’t make you punk.”
I think you’re assuming there’s some kind of universal coherence or centrality to a punk ideology when there really isn’t any. There are plenty of right-wing punks and to them the KKK could absolutely be punk. I don’t think ‘revolution’ or politics necessarily define all punk scenes either. Since most people develop an interest in punk during their adolescent years, punk is much more a vehicle for coping with feelings of alienation or difference from ones peers. Punk is much more about the incoherent and confused frustrations of youth, not some high-minded social revolution (and I think it’s better that way). Miley Cyrus could absolutely be punk. She doesn’t have to stand for anything but not really giving a shit. That’s pretty much what punk was founded on.
“You indicate punk is “queers and people of color and womyn and everyone who refuses to assimilate or perpetuate oppression” and then suggest people listen to” Bikini Kill, Kathleen Hanna has openly oppressed transgender people.
i think throwing accusations of racism around as well as broadcasting an Us V. Them philosophy is damaging. especially if you in some way are trying to define a group through writing and therefore; trying to, in small way, represent that group. i, as a punk, have bridged some of my issues with capitalism, police, government, idiots, other punks and so on, enough to have something to offer more than alienation for the people involved with those ideas, policies, organizations or ways of life. granted, no matter what my personal journeys lead me to conclude, i certainly don’t expect those same conclusions from anyone else, but that’s my punk ethic; that i don’t define what punk is or isn’t. punk is not the standard for which i judge my pop culture, and i understand that that is mostly what this article is trying to say, however punk’s been in pop culture since it’s inception and there is no way to avoid that. complaining about it and stretching definitions to meet a level of righteous outrage is not going to change it. people will see miley sirus however they chose to see her until she defines her intentions (hopefully as a woman taking full control of her identity in a pop culture that deeply discourages that behavior in women. but i don’t listen to her stuff that much and i’m not paying that much attention). it seems like argument is that miley sirus is trying to culturally appropriate punk by being described that way. my retort would be that punk is no one’s culture to have or to be appropriated from.
Bad Brains said some ignorant stuff probably because they were young and angry, so I am sure they have regret about that. Like when girls get mad and call each other “fat”, guys do the same, but call each other “faggot”. Sadly it’s deep rooted, but I would like to think that way of thinking has changed. What about the Adolescents, the Meatmen..some of their music had homophobic lyrics. As a forty something punk I remember see all of these bands in their prime and running into that mindset wasn’t a surprise. At least the shows I went to were made up of all types of young kids, gay included. Everyone was an outsider. A couple things that punk had back in the early 80’s that it doesn’t have today is a sense of humor, and tongue & cheek sarcasm. There was no internet microscope ready to parse every word or report every event. Sure there were those who were more politically involved, but punk allowed us to have fun and think outside the box which followed most of us into adulthood. They can toss around the word “punk” all they want, but no amount of corporate packaging will ever come close to the original intent of – fuck the system, fuck your idols, I will not conform to your rules.
Mo def did a great job on the article but I think saying punk was never about fashion is historically inaccurate (see definitive punk bands pre-Crass: I.e. Ramones w their leather jackets and the Sex Pistols- a band started by a fashion designer to help sell clothes). That is not to understate where we are today: as (even this may be a bit optimistic) post-fashion-centric punkers who have developed decades of critical analysis/theory regarding various facets of oppression. That being said, I don’t think identity politics are too convoluted/short-sighted to serve as our only defining characteristic.
Not every one develops a class analysis or becomes radicalized through punk music, though it seems an integral catalysts for young, white, middle class folks in the US. Society the Spectacle was penned before the punk rock phenomenon, as was many other radical works… So, to me what’s important is not so much that punk-itself stays alive and vibrant, but the ethos and discourse against oppression have a place to continue onward.
Having read the article in question along with many other of Ozzi’s pieces, it would surprise me greatly if he was being completely sincere. My guess would be that it was intended irritate punk elitists and people who took distinctions between what is and isn’t “punk” way too seriously. There is very little that can link all bands that are “punk” together. A significant aspect of punk initially was that it encouraged individuality and had a different definition for everyone. This notion has of course long since passed and was arguably never really true in practice anyway, but i would say it’s still worth keeping in mind.
Random Side Note: Johnny Ramone is a fervent Replubican who ended his “Hall of Fame” admittance speech with “God Bless Bush. God Bless America.”
. . . .Oh dear, I’m rambling again. Point is : Ozzi’s article was almost certainly written with the intention of pissing off people such as yourselves . . . .it seemed to work. . .
I really like this article, and although punk truly isnt dead, I think a lot of people get it confused. having read thru some of the pending posts that will most likely remain unpublished in response to this article, it seems that the majority of idiotic sheep (oops I mean people) think that for some reason punk has a presence in pop culture. well it doesnt. and as to people who think that punk deserves a spot in pop music, it doesnt. TRUE PUNK HAS ALWAYS AND WILL ALWAYS BE UNDERGROUND. AND IT WILL ALWAYS BE A THREAT TO MAJOR SOCIETY, LIKE A THORN IN THE SIDE IF YOU WILL. punk is collectivist and individualist at the same time. punk is political and having fun at the same time. punk is and will always be: anti – authoritarian, anti – racist, anti – homophobic, pro – womyn bordering on anti – porn, anti – greed, anti – capitalist and anti – money promoting instead a balanced task based society. AND TRUE PUNK WILL NEVER BE RIGHT WING YA FUCKTARDS! that said, punk may not be entirely left wing either, but trying to mix pracitcality with leftist philosophies in order to attempt to make a better world out of this shit hep that we call western civilization. unfortunately the powers that be will never let us achieve this vision voluntarily. we will have to take direct action, and work from the inside out, like a cancer invading the host.
here’s a link from Extreme Noise that you may like. it s called 23 pieces of evidence that punk is dead:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/alexnaidus/pieces-of-evidence-that-punk-is-dead
punk is a vacant ideology, “punk rock” is a synonym for cool. every CEO and ad man wants to be fucking “punk rock”. what does punk stand for? individualism and liberalism. we are at end game for both of those. they have completely permeated society. “punk” isn’t rebelling against shit. punk is cool. “hippy” is still a dirty word, “hippy” is still an insult, no one wants to be called a “hippy”. it’s because hippies had values that were a threat to capitalism, a threat to the social order, punk is weak as fuck.