“In the case of Hynde she didn’t make a big stink because she gave Rush permission before he used it. ”

That’s incorrect. Rush was using the song as his opener from very early on, if not the very beginning of his syndicated broadcast. I distinctly recall in the early 90’s that he suddenly switched the opening to something else. This remained the case for roughly a week and then resumed using the Hynde track. He explained in that same time frame that he’d received essentially a “cease and desist” from Hynde, but that they had come to a mutually agreeable resolution. I presumed at the time that it probably involved a considerable sum, but with this recent revelation about her Dad, perhaps not so much or any at all.

That’s a reason to disagree strongly and to talk to the person about why you see it that way. It’s no reason to hate them unless they also already see it that way. Which the vast majority do not.

They see it as being kind to those less fortunate. They don’t see it as “being enslaved to the state.”

I have to say that to me, especially in context of the phrase “…he loved listening to Rush”, “Rush” means the band; “Rush Limbaugh” means the radio host. I don’t listen to Rush Limbaugh nor do I know anyone (IRL) who does; when I hear or read a reference to the radio host it’s always in the form of “Rush Limbaugh” not just “Rush.” I wouldn’t think of him as just Rush, any more than I thought of Howard Stern as just Howard.

The “divide” is about whether to a free people and members of a representative republic or be enslaved to the state.

That is not an agree to disagree issue. That is a pick your side and fight to the death issue and winner takes all.

https://www.redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2020/02/18/walk-away-democrat-who-left-party-after-attending-trump-rally-not-backing-down-in-face-of-harassment/

Of course, that’s not the situation we are addressing here. Hynde could have made a big public stink and stopped Limbaugh — a person she disagrees with — from using her music. Do you not understand what I mean?

That’s not what she did. (Or Queen.) In fact she switched it around to the opposite — making a public show of tolerance. That’s what we are talking about. Since I support Hynde’s stand, I’m saying I would do the same.

I left myself some wiggle room in case someone like you moved the goalposts to “Well, Mr. Huxley, would allow your music to be used while people were being shoved into ovens?” No, I would not.

I agree. I’ve never considered disagreeing with someone a qualifier to not talk to them anymore. Or to cancel them as they now do. Some on the left will make noise about this.

huxley

I might have words with anyone using my creative material for whatever reasons. But I sure wouldn’t make a big public stink about it. I don’t think I would do it over politics, assuming the usual fees were paid.

Right, but famous people only have to say something once [having words] for it to be a big deal.

Brian May of Queen said of Trump using his lyrics:

“Permission to use the track was neither sought nor given,” concerning the Queen hit “We Are The Champions” being used as Trump’s “theme song.” May also added, “It has always been against our policy to allow Queen music to be used as a political campaigning tool.”

I don’t consider that making a stink but some would. I say it’s just an artist wanting their song not to be used. But, true, if fees are paid then some artists might consider it. Some musicians certainly play concerts at rallies to help get bigger crowds for the candidate.

I just finished a 4,000 word essay of which the last sentence is “And that’s why the culture war is a war, not an argument.”