iamfuckhead

[iamfuckhead]

"Most social revolutions begin peaceably. Why would it be otherwise? Who would not prefer to assemble and demonstrate rather than engage in mortal combat against pitiless forces that enjoy every advantage in mobility and firepower? Revolutions in Russia, China, Vietnam, and El Salvador all began peacefully, with crowds of peasants and workers launching nonviolent protests only to be met with violent oppression from the authorities. Peaceful protest and reform are exactly what the people are denied by the ruling oligarchs. The dissidents who continue to fight back, who try to defend themselves from the oligarchs' repressive fury, are then called 'violent revolutionaries' and 'terrorists.'"

- Michael Parenti, Blackshirts and Reds

[iamfuckhead]

Squid Game Season Two Analysis: Capitalist Ideology, The Illusion of Democracy, and The Necessity for Revolution

Why the second season of Squid Game is a great follow-up to the first season and offers us an even more radical critique of capitalism and its supposedly "free" and "democratic" institutions.

(Spoiler warning for both seasons. I won't go into too much detail, but some spoilers for the bigger plot points will be present)

I really enjoyed the second season of Squid Game, so I was surprised when I learned that a good amount of fans of the first season did not feel the same.

Because of that, I wanna give my thoughts on the themes and messages that this season in particular offers us and why I believe season 2 is, in many ways, even more radical than season 1 in its narrative choices.

Season One: The Dehumanizing Nature of Capitalism

Season 1 did a great job as a more general critique of capitalism (with some elements that are more specific to South Korea). It showed us a story of impoverished people that are so desparate that they find themselves trapped in a literal game of life and death that forces them to not only compete with other participants who are in similar financial situations, but to sometimes even betray and kill them just to survive and possibly win the big money at the end of all rounds.

To make it all even more cruel: It is soon revealed that the whole game just exists for the entertainment of rich elites who change the conditions of the game as they please when they are bored.

Needless to say: The game in Squid Game is a pretty heavy-handed allegory for the predatory nature of capitalism and how it literally kills us. The creator himself has stated this multiple times, since there are still people who (willingly or unwillingly) deny this.

There are already plenty of great analyses of these aspects in season 1 (I really recommend the video on YouTube called "Squid Game: Ideology and The New Soviet Man" by Kay and Skittles), so let's move on to season 2.

Season Two: The Setup

Our protagonist is once again Gi-hun, the only survivor of all games from season 1. He is practically a billionaire since he won all the money in season 1, and could therefore live a pretty comfortable life.

And yet he is fixated on one singular goal: To track down the location where the games take place to put a stop to them once and for all. Gi-hun feels guilty to spend his fortune on anything else than this one goal, since it's a fortune that came from the deaths of his friends and countless other people.

Gi-hun eventually finds himself back in the game after every other approach failed. Unfortunately for him, the tracker that he surgically implanted in his tooth got removed while he was knocked out and transported into the game. He is once again forced to participate in the game, since his rescue team that was supposed to save him and attack the island on which the games take place cannot locate him as of now.

The Greatness of Gi-hun: Resisting Hyperindividualism, Cynicism and Capitalist Ideas of Worth

I really like Gi-hun as a character. He started out as a deadbeat dad who got into severe debt because of his gambling addiction. Gi-hun is someone who many people that are entrenched in neoliberal capitalist ideology wouldn't feel much sympathy for at first, as he's shown to be pretty reckless and just overall far from a noble hero when we first get introduced to his character in season 1.

If you're from the west (or a country like South Korea which has a similar hyperindividualist capitalist culture), then you are taught to see Gi-hun's situation as something self-caused, as something he freely chose to be in with his own bad decisions. Furthermore, you're taught to see his socio-economic situation as a direct reflection of his value as a person.

In the series itself, the Front Man, the VIPs and even some other players in the game reinforce this way of thinking. They constantly express the sentiment that the players in the game are "worthless", "scum" and "trash" that deserves to be "filtered out" (killed) because they are responsible for the situation that they are in and have no worth anyway, as their socio-economic status shows according to this logic.

Gi-hun is someone who rejects all of this.

In season 2, we see him more determined than ever to save as many people as possible in the game, and to ultimately put an end to the game itself. He does not believe in the narrative that people's worth is determined by their socio-economic status, nor that they are completely self-responsible for their situation and therefore deserve to be killed in the game.

Gi-hun calls the game out for what it is: A predatory and cruel tool of rich capitalists that preys on people's fears and vulnerabilities to encourage the worst aspects of people's personalities to flourish, all just for the entertainment of rich investors who see the players as expendable and enjoy watching them die and betray each other.

Gi-hun isn't particularly gifted or talented, he's not the exceptional, flawless individual that neoliberalism fetishizes. He can be cowardly, insecure, frightened and even selfish, as we saw in season 1 when he lied to the old man to save his own life.

But at the end of the day, he is someone with an unwavering belief in the worth and potential of people despite what his hypercapitalist neoliberal culture (and people deeply embedded into it) constantly tells him. He's someone who, despite all his flaws, risks his life and happiness for that simple belief.

Gi-hun is the antidote to a deeply cynical, hyperindividualistic and neoliberal capitalist society that conditions us to not believe in the worth and potential of other people beyond their wealth and social status.

The Illusion of Democracy: A deceptive Facade of Free Choice and Equality

Let's look at the game itself this season, since there have been a few changes to its rules.

In this season, the surviving players are given the opportunity to vote after each round to either continue into the next round or to stop playing and divide the money that has accumulated so far among each player that survived. The more players die, the more money gets added to the final prize and the fewer people need to share the total sum with each other, meaning each player gets more money in the end if the majority votes to stop playing.

The staff of the game keeps emphasizing how the players chose to be part of the game, how they always have the option to leave, how the game respects free choice and values democracy, how everyone is equal in the game, and how the rules are fair and universal.

Unsurprisingly, this is all nonsense.

The players are not even aware that they are playing with their lives at risk until after the first game, a game called "Red Light, Green Light", which has a high fatality rate because once the first player dies, the shock and sudden rush of fear causes people to panic, leading to more deaths.

The first season also showed us that the VIPs can change the rules and conditions of the game whenever they feel like it, even during a round.

Age, health, knowledge and experience with the particular games that are being played in each round can also make the difference between life and death. Sometimes the games also straight up involve a factor of luck that the players have no real control over.

Then there's also the fact that not every player is in the same situation. Some players, such as Hyun-ju or Yong-sik, are shown to have severely more debt than others and lost significantly more in their life, which means some have the privilege to be all set again after just one or two rounds (if the majority votes to stop playing) while others will have barely earned enough money to fix their life, and would therefore need to play more rounds to achieve that outcome.

Some also have family and friends that need them, while others lost everything and have no one to come home to. All these factors make them unequal and shape the way they vote.

So basically: The players are stuck in a game that they didn't even know puts their life in danger until after they played the first round. The only reason they entered in the first place was because of their precarious situation that varies in severity from person to person (which means some have the privilege to vote to end the game early with their financial issues fixed, while others do not). Some players have more advantages than others in each round because of age, health, knowledge, experience or even just sheer luck. And the VIPs can just change the rules of the game whenever they feel like it.

Squid Game tells us very clearly that it thinks very little of the rhetoric of "free choice" "free democracy" and "equality" in a structurally coercive, brutal and predatory system with fundamentally unequal conditions such as our capitalist society.

The Front Man: Cynicism, Vote Manipulation and Counter-Revolution

A key aspect of the second season of Squid Game is that the Front Man himself pretends to be a regular player; he participates in the games among Gi-hun and the rest as player 001. The Front Man deliberately gets close to Gi-hun and even manages to win his trust pretty easily with his down-to-earth and kind facade, making him involved in Gi-hun's every move.

The Front Man is, in many ways, the opposite of Gi-hun.

He is shown in both seasons to think very little of the players and humanity as a whole. He sees the participants of the game as worthless trash that deserves to get sorted out. The Front Man believes humanity is selfish, greedy and cannot be better than what it is right now, which makes the game a necessary part of the world to him.

The Front Man is thoroughly entrenched in the cynical, neoliberal capitalist worldview that sees humans as fundamentally selfish and greedy beings that only have themselves to blame for their situations.

It is noteworthy that the Front Man is very fixated on Gi-hun, and even seems to grow a liking to him because of his unwavering belief in the value and potential of people that he upholds despite all the horrors and betrayal that he witnessed. This suggests that a small part of the Front Man might still have hope that Gi-hun is right and wants him to succeed in his goal.

But at the end of the day, we see that his cynical and neoliberal view on humanity rules over what little hope in a better world he might have.

As such, the Front Man ultimately sabotages Gi-hun's efforts whenever he can. When the vote was tied after the first round, he votes to continue into the next round so that more people die, something Gi-hun fought to prevent by making it clear to the other players that more people will die if they continue.

But this is not the only time he manipulates Gi-hun's efforts: When Gi-hun organizes an armed resistance to finally put an end to the game itself for good, the Front Man betrays him in the last minute by kiling members of the resistance group and then shooting Gi-hun's best friend in front of him in order to emotionally break Gi-hun and make him lose hope.

The Front Man is not just a despicable antagonist, he also serves as a pretty blunt example of a member of the ruling class that rigs elections and destroys revolutionary movements from within, a strategy that imperialist powers such as the US have utilized many times in history already.

When Voting isn't enough: The Necessity of Revolution and Class War

Despite Gi-hun's attempt to end the game for good having failed (at least for now), I don't believe the message of Squid Game's second season is one of resignation. Not only is the game shown to be fundamentally unjust and rigged, but voting alone is also portrayed to not be enough.

Throughout the whole season, those who vote to end the game never succeed. This is not a coincidence. The game is designed to make it the less likely outcome not just because of the involvement of Front Man, but because the game preys on people's despair and precarity, all while also encouraging selfish, greedy and reckless behavior in its very design.

But even if enough people voted to end the game: The next batch of players would just be thrown into the same situation Gi-hun and the others just escaped from. A successful majority vote to leave the game would save many lives, but Gi-hun's fight would be far from over. His goal to put a permanent end to the game would not be achieved yet.

The staff of the game also makes a deliberate choice to put a big X or O onto the jumpsuit of each player depending on how they voted. This encourages players to define themselves as either Xs or Os, which leads to hostility towards the players of the other fraction.

This reaches a point where players of both fractions plan to murder the other fraction in order to secure the next vote for themselves.

But Gi-hun puts a stop to that.

He realizes it's a deliberate distraction so that people fight each other rather than the game itself. He proposes that the players should instead organize together to fight the real oppressors that forced them into the whole situation in the first place.

They are not Xs or Os. They are impoverished and desparate people who were manipulated to participate into a literal game of death that requires suffering, betrayal and murder for victory.

The message of Squid Game Season Two is one of collective resistance and revolution:

The institutions of a fundamentally rigged and predatory class system are not enough to abolish the system itself. Voting can be used as a form of damage control, but it cannot replace collective action and organizing.

Instead of fighting each other, we need to organize together to fight the system itself. It is the only way we can truly all be liberated from the death game of capitalism.

[iamfuckhead]

Why Not??? mv and lyric analysis

I think this song is about how the media/press/smth portrayed Joost (especially Israeli-backed media) and how he was generally treated by the EBU when he was disqualified. He leans into how they called and treated him like an unstable, hateful terror, and then disproves it.

I really enjoyed this song, and the music video is fucking insane work. The directing and editing of the music video is absolutely phenomenal.

TITLE:

The title of the song is definitely a reference to Joost’s question, “why not?” at the semi-final press conference. A Polish journalist asked the Israeli contestant, Eden Golan, “have you ever thought that by being here you bring risk and danger to other participants and the public?” The host continued to intervene and say that she did not have to answer the question if she did not want to. Joost shouted, “why not?”

INTRO:

“Once, there was a boy, and he had a dream But then, one day, his dream was taken away”

These words are spoken by Donny Ronny, who plays a broadcaster on an old vintage TV. In the background, Joost wakes up to an alarm and begins getting ready. This is about, as most know, Joost’s profound personal connection to Eurovision with his family, and his dream to participate and win it. I think the choice to make the voice a TV broadcaster just ties it to the way his story was covered by the press and on the news. The use of “boy” seems like a reference to the boy he was in Europapa. I went to his NYC show, and the introduction’s visuals had numerous clips from the articles and pieces on him.

CHORUS:

“Why not, why not Do what you wanna do? Why not? Why not? Why the fuck not?”

We get this very typical 2000s emo tune and vocals from Joost. The visuals in the music video also align with it: the camera quality is bad and distorted; Joost has got teased hair, eyeliner, and armwarmers; and his friends Appie and Marijn in the back have typical emo shaggy hair and a dyed mohawk as they thrash guitars. This is all him leaning into how the press portrayed him after he said “why not?” but I’ll get into that more with VERSE 1.

He’s showing the mischaracterization he experienced when he asked “why not,” characterized as someone brash and hateful and saying shit just to say it.

The media backlash was immediate and harsh, with many articles and posts being written about his “attack on Israel.” Additionally, he faced harassment from the Israeli delegation, being filmed behind the scenes and even at the urinals. When he was asked which delegation had filmed him, he only said, “I think everybody knows.”

But seriously, why not?

VERSE 1:

“Evil corporations ruling all the nations Not on my watch Media sensation, money inflation Why the fuck not?”

These lyrics (along with what I brought up above) fully emulate those shitty rebellious cash-grab (dare I say industry plant?) emo songs of the 2000s. The kind that watered down whatever real message emocore had as it emerged out of punk. It’s got all the buzzwords: “evil corporations, media sensation, money inflation.” I’d say Joost is playing into this. The Israeli delegation, the EBU, and a lot of other news outlets portrayed and treated him like he was simply some rowdy, performative rebel. The kind that is just singing mindlessly about the problems of capitalism and politics, yada-yada, to be disobedient, without actually caring, and then throws in the cliche “not on my watch.”

They reduce him to some ignorant, single-minded stance that is just angrily yapping. Maybe it’s easier to ignore and refute the real concerns of a person when you misrepresent them as just a loudmouth agitator who’s emo and bitter.

Joost says, okay, so this is how you see me?

“Follow me, you will see Turn my dreams to reality Follow me, you will see That it was all just meant to be”

Again, super duper cliche with the whole 2000s emo image. He does reference his dreams, maybe bringing up how some outlets portrayed his yknow actual emotional connection to the contest and his dream to win as something insincere in this new light.

INTERLUDE:

“Hello, hello, can you hear me?”

I hear ya!

During VERSE 1 and the CHORUS, Joost, as an employee, deals with all the issues of this hectic cafe, his manager reprimanding him.

VERSE 2 (English translation from Genius):

“It is the song of life that you produce yourself, and And this is for everyone who doesn't fully function, and This is something different than what society teaches you I see someone else in pain, yet it still hurts me”

This part feels genuine; he’s out of the voice of the old emo character. Even beyond just songs, it is the way you live and the choices you make that is the art. This song and what he is expressing in it isn’t the BS society teaches you. I think this song is in some ways an answer or explanation on why he said “why not?” The thumbnail even says “THE TRUTH BEHIND WHY NOT.” Despite how everyone is taking and evaluating his statement, it is as simple as when he sees someone else in pain, it hurts him too. 

More on why Joost had said, “why not?” during the panel: In Joost’s own words, after being interviewed by the Guardian, he said, “I just said that as the most Dutch person that I am. So someone gets a cookie. Someone else gets a cookie. Someone else – not. Why not? Equality is very important, especially in a competition.” Simple as that.

People reacted so severely when he said that, mainly zionists, but others too. I think he’s trying to make the broader point that his view and perspective are ones of compassion. Compassion is simple and essential, yet so many lack it. I’d agree that caring for others is different from what society teaches you. You can look at this whole incident!

"Time and time again, the world proves to be wrong It's about time that I finally learn The people with the money want more and more and more They said, ‘Jo-Joost Klein, you are disqualified’, what?”

The world proved itself wrong in how he was disqualified. It means more than just his disqualification; it’s what it says about the whole workings of the system, who they prioritize and who they’ll abandon.

Let’s get real, Joost wouldn’t have been disqualified if Israel had not targeted him. The incident with the Swedish broadcaster was just a minor happening that Israel co-opted to disqualify him, using their funding (Moroccan Oil) as power to pressure the EBU. And the EBU said whatever you say! And just like that, they abandoned him for that sweet, sweet cash. “The people with the money” are the funders of Eurovision, specifically the Israeli company Moroccan Oil. They are the ones to say, “Joost Klein, you are disqualified.” This is what he’s talking about, I reckon.

To learn more about how Eurovision is completely rigged for Israel, watch verilybitchie’s video “8 Ways Eurovision is Rigged for Israel.” I would highly recommend it if you’re somebody interested in Eurovision, and she prompts people to boycott Eurovision as it is just a mouthpiece for Israeli propaganda. I am not a fan of Eurovision, but if you are, uhhh yknow consider boycotting if you’ve got any matter in your head. I don’t like Eurovision because of what it stands for, both as a weird corporate music competition (don’t compete with your art, just make it!”, but also because they break their back to serve the Israeli regime.

In the story of the music video, Joost plays an employee at an internet cafe. The whole music he has been trying to accommodate the customers and their chaos. At the lyric, “They said, ‘Jo-Joost Klein, you are disqualified’, what,” the internet cafe manager, played by the director, slams a paper that says “FIRED” down onto Joost’s desk. So he’s been fired for the craziness and utter disrespect of all the customers? How odd because that’s not his fault… heyy I get it! He’s created a parallel between the story in the MV and the lyrics!

TL;DR: f the greedy pigs

PRE-CHORUS:

“They saw me as the perpetrator Emotional damage No money, but I have to pay So I guess I do resemble my father after all”

I like his choice of the word “saw.” It emphasizes a distinction between the reality of a situation vs how it was perceived or represented. The public, Eurovision people, the press, saw him as the perpetrator in this whole thing (I’d say it refers both to the press conference and the charge from the Swedish broadcaster, but also his whole position in the dynamic of the 2024 Eurovision), and yet that wasn’t the reality. He knew the truth about his interaction with the Swedish broadcaster, and yet was called guilty by the public (no evidence, even), and more broadly he was seen as the perpetrator in all of Eurovision against Israel. In reality, he was the one, as I mentioned before, who was harassed. But even beyond just him, I’d say (again, ME SAYING THIS) the real perpetrators are the Israeli regime, those who promote and endorse it, and the victims are the people of Palestine who continue to face a genoclde and have been denied humanitarian aid for months.

“Emotional damage” because yeah, this whole thing was emotionally damaging, but it also might be a reference to the 2021 meme “emotional damage”??? But it was initially “Emotionele schade” in Dutch, so the English translation could just match the meme. The meme would go with his whole internet vibe, but I don’t know, it’s not that important.

“No money, but I have to pay” references the earlier lyric about the people with the money wanting more and more and more, because he was the one abandoned by the EBU in exchange for maintaining their partnership with the Israeli regime. What did he even have to do with it? Yet he pays the price.

I don’t fully understand the reference to his father, as I don’t know much about him. I feel weird speculating about the meaning of the lyric since it’s so tied to his father. All I’ll say is that it might refer to the work his father did, and I understand he was the inspiration behind Europapa, “a world without borders,” so he was clearly VERY BASED.

In the music video, Joost has just been fired, and the manager character is on the closing shift for the internet cafe (is it really 24/7 then? Haha fuck off sorry) then BAM Joost straight up like Nosferatu is back for revenge. He’s real monstrous now and is tearing into the manager! (This scene in the music video is so fucking amazing, everyone who worked on it is so fucking talented.) He’s making fun of the EBU, the press, and the media for their treatment and portrayal of him, acting like he was a monster. Now he’s a vampirous monster tearing out the heart of his suited-up manager, meant to represent something like the EBU or whatever professional group. It’s all about how he was exaggerated and misrepresented, and now this is how they portray his reaction to his disqualification. I find this part real funny and beautiful.

OUTRO:

“This is for you and I Don't forget the T and the Y 'Cause I'm thankful, grateful, the opposite of hateful Unity 'til the day we die”

Very nice lyrics here very witty. It all turns into U-N-I-T-Y! He’s setting the record straight about what he is after all the mischaracterization: he’s “thankful, grateful, the opposite of hateful.” In direct opposition to how he was portrayed as hateful by much of the world. For example by Israeli-backed news (Ynet news, Jerusalem Post, Israel Hayom), Israeli TV (Eretz Nehederet), the delegation, and basically anyone without a brain or who likes the privileges backing an apartheid regime provides.

This is sung by an angelic UNITY Joost on the screens of the computers, as VAMPIRE Joost listens, crouching down and about to feast on his manager’s heart. VAMPIRE Joost inches closer to the screen, and clicks on the link for UNITY.

I think it depicts his choice to emerge from the pain of disqualification to instead focus on unity, seen in the title and theme of his whole album. Maybe vampiric Joost represents the path he was beginning to follow or the one the media acted like he was following, but either way, now he’s all about unity. He’s taking the “unity” that Eurovision apparently stands for and then actually stands for it. Supa ironic, Eurovision. I really like his choice to stand for and work for unity. He’s realized something, maybe.

But Joost makes it clear that just because he’s all for unity now, it doesn’t mean he’s going back to Eurovision. He’s disillusioned with them and their BS. In the ending clip, we see Joost is back working at the internet cafe, but on the window, there’s a flyer that says “HIRING INTERNET CAFE MANAGER,” so the manager is definitely dead. Returning to the cafe shows return to music career but not the rigidity of Eurovision because manager is heartless.

ENDING THOUGHTS:

To get slightly personal (skip this paragraph if you don’t gaf) but still vague to remain anonymous so that I won’t be found out and expelled, a similar thing happened to me at my high school. Last year, I spoke out against Israel’s genocide against Palestinians on social media, and a day later, I was suspended. Then I was suspended again, and again, and again, as they lengthened my suspension 3 times. This happened because the parents at my school found out, and were doing all that they could to kick me out of the school (because the easiest way they felt they could do something was bullying a teenager), through harassing me and threats, but mainly through the power their donations had over the administration. The school bent in every which way to accommodate them, and I paid the price. The parents wanted me expelled, but somehow I wasn’t. But it still fucked me up to be treated like that, abandoned by my school without care, and bullied by my peers and their parents. Way more happened, but I’ll be hush-hush till I graduate. But that’s why I’ve been such a fan of Joost’s album Unity and his overall journey, because the music has really helped me get over my whole situation, and I feel I really identify with it. Moving on.

“Why Not?” is a simple and completely inoffensive question, and yet the Zionist movement looks for anyone they can claim as an aggressor, so that they can have their excuse to attack (remind you of anything lol?). And the Zionist movement took “Why Not?” as their excuse, and proceeded to enact a sort of witch hunt. Per usual, Zionists take something apolitical and unabashedly involve themselves in it (take this clip from the 2024 Olympics as an example. It’s pretty funny.), and that then results in a political statement against them. Cut to what followed after May, 2024.

I really like how Joost has reclaimed the phrase “Why Not?” It was immediately harped over, used to harm him and his image, to misrepresent and boil him down. He is now making the choice to rep the phrase; he wore a polo that said “Why Not?” at Pinkpop in June, he wrote a whole song with the phrase, and it’s a lyric in Last Man Standing. He’s in this new era of unity and using “Why Not?” to say and mean what he wants. That’s why I think “Why Not???” is also such a good first track on the album, it’s an opener to his journey for unity.

Don’t be a sheep. Question things. 

Once again, let me know about your thoughts! I plan to write more analyses, maybe on Luchtballoon or Last Man Standing next. I don't believe in proofreading. SOURCES: Guardian article: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2025/mar/11/joost-klein-eurovision-scandal-europapa

[iamfuckhead]

United by Music lyric and mv analysis

I’d say this song is Joost’s reflection on Eurovision and his experience with it (as is the whole album Unity), specifically on the “internationally unified” message that Eurovision/the EBU wants their contestants to set forth; but as Joost and Tommy Cash show in this satire, you simply can’t get the peace and unity that Eurovision wants by taking both sides individually; you can’t have both, and making these musicians the symbols and face of this, hypocritical and frankly low-effort, message, harms them.

First thing, I enjoyed this song a lot. I thought the vocals and lyrics were fun, and I really enjoyed the music video (nice job, Tim Rudle!). So the title of the song is taken straight from Eurovision’s slogan “United by Music” (okay buddy), and Tommy Cash and Joost are about to show us how they and the people of the world are United by Music!

INTRO:

In the very opening of the video, there is a cartoon pigeon getting his cig lit as he starts to smoke it. Pigeons are a symbol of peace and allathat, but the image of a pigeon, specifically the pigeon as a symbol of peace, is ridiculous and funny. We hear a pitter-patter warlike drum beat as the pigeon begins to speak. He says,

“For millions of years, the World Peace Committee has had one mission: to establish peace, love, and unity. But, despire countless efforts, they have failed. The world remains divided and hope is fading. They only have one option left.”

Millions of years? The World Peace Committee? Civilization, and even biologically modern humans, haven’t been around that long; and though there is a World Peace Council, this committee just seems like a generic kinda half-assed org. It’s exaggerated. The camera pans to the members of this World Peace Committee: a Jared Leto-looking guy as PEACE, a modern-looking Mother Mary with a nose piercing and baby Jesus as LOVE, and some suited-up general guy (probably the EBU/Eurovision) as UNITY. The camera then focuses on a guy in an apron crying profusely, but the camera pans down to show that he’s just cutting onions. FAKER! I’m unsure of who the Jared Leto PEACE guy is meant to represent, but LOVE and UNITY are pretty clear. So basically these are the people who– apparently! –so dearly want PEACE, LOVE, and UNITY (what a weird mash-up of people!). But it’s all insincere because no, they’re not partnering with Mother Mary, and this apron dude is crying because of onions.

Baby Jesus continues after the smoking pigeon, saying 

“MR. KLEIN, CASH, ATTENTION!”

This absolutely stacked committee has failed, so they, specifically BABY JESUS, are calling to… MUSICIANS?! for help. The army drum beat is now loud and stomping and serious (peace, love, and unity are serious issues!). Joost and Tommy are addressed by their last names, all professional the way media people do. Joost and Tommy enter wearing jesters’ outfits as they march up to the World Peace Committee. They get a stamped paper with their mission, that is to “MAKE LOVE, PEACE, AND UNITY NOW,” from PEACE Jared Leto. Their jesters’ outfits show they’re just entertainment, and not meant to be anything serious for the higher-ups.

Obviously, this is them making fun of the absurdity of the way Eurovision portrays their message: all these super powerful people have failed, despite their best efforts, at unity, and the world’s only hope is musicians. Joost and Tommy say BULLLLLSHIIIIT. 

We also get the PRE-CHORUS:

“We want peace, they want war (da-da-da, da-da-da-da) Rich stay rich, poor stay poor (da-da-da, da-da-da-da)”

Seemingly, the voice of the committee. The committee (EBU) wants peace; they (who?) want war. This statement is very divisive and reductive, as it places a target on some nebulous “they” group. Saying something like, “Eurovision is the one that wants peace, and some other group that we can’t even identify or say much about is what stands in the way!” and as all their talk of peace happens, the rich continue to stay rich, and the poor continue to stay poor. The voice of Eurovision in these lyrics and their entire movement seems (to me) to be intentionally reductive of the true political conflicts occurring, and also as a distraction to prevent the public from pointing the finger to the real cause of war and conflict, capitalist greed (as Rosa Luxemburg and many others said and continue to say, you’re only going to get disarmament with the fall of capitalism). Eurovision is a distraction meant to misplace effort for peace, the same way BP (British Petroleum, oil company) funded and popularized the individual “lifestyle carbon footprint” to distract the public from realizing that the main contributor to the climate crisis is corporations like them.

But Joost and Tommy are made the face of the movement anyway. They’re dressed in white peace clothes in the unity-mobile, as Joost twiddles his thumbs nervously, and they drive through a crowd of ridiculous-looking angry punks and seething goons (goon, lol). If only the anger of the world were that simple, EBU!

They press the unity button together, and the music begins.

CHORUS: TOMMY CASH

“I want to fly to Kyiv, and go to Moscow I wanna vote Kamala and I wanna vote Trump”

As soon as Tommy Cash gets the first lyric outta his mouth, the car backs up, and we pass by the same crowd of punks and goons who are now happy! and dancing! Wow, I guess music does solve everything, thanks Eurovision!

But there is a clear reference to Russia and the nation’s invasion of Ukraine. Then, of course, the United States 2024 Election. But we see the pattern here that both “sides” of these conflicts are taken: he wants to go to Kyiv AND Moscow, he wants to vote for both Kamala Harris AND Donald Trump. There’s not really any meet in the middle (I don’t like meet in the middle BS, it’s just another option for navigating these politics) or neutrality, but advocacy for both. But in reality, you can’t go to both Kyiv and Moscow (I mean, maybe?), as an American I know, you definitely can’t vote for two candidates (unless you’re so motivated to commit voter fraud and want to just cancel out your votes). Both very polarizing political topics right now. I remember seeing some people getting upset about the Trump and Kamala lyric… brah you’re probably 14 but cmon use your brain so you can develop into a more perceptive and thoughtful person.

He continues, 

“I wanna be sober and I wanna take a bump I wanna take the piss, but I gotta take a dump”

Little explanation needed. You can’t do coke and be sober (is coke straight edge X?). You can’t piss and shit at the same time. Yeah yeah.

VERSE 1: JOOST

“Fuck the EBU, I don't want to go to court The less get less and the more get more”

The first line is a clear reference to his disqualification at Eurovision and the charges, later dropped, against him (I’ll get deeper into that in my future analysis of Why Not???). “The less get less and the more get more” is very similar to the lyric in the PRE-CHORUS: “Rich stay rich, poor stay poor.” Additionally, he references the same idea a few times in “Why Not???” I think it is all a reference to the way EBU treated him, specifically how they just abandoned him. As he personally experienced with his disqualification, the less continue to get less, so that the more get more. By this, I mean that I think the Israeli media’s latching onto Joost and harassment of him shows that internally, they were also trying to pressure Eurovision into disqualifying him. I am entirely certain that if the Israeli media (and probably their government, too) had not been pressuring Eurovision, then Joost would not have been disqualified. The disqualification of Joost was such an overreaction because in reality, Eurovision bent to serve Israel and disqualified him for them, only using the incident as an excuse.

“But fuck that shit, I just want the hardcore I wanna buy a Samsung in the Apple Store”

But Joost says “fuck that shit” meaning he’s over the incident and doesn’t care, specifically Eurovision’s unjust treatment of him. He continues that he just wants “the hardcore.” On this line, I have two different interpretations. Meaning 1 is that “hardcore” is a reference to the music style, and that he wants to go back to making music (as in being involved with Eurovision again). Meaning 2 is that he wants a hardcore that would allow him to put this all behind him and not actually care about things. I think either way, the message is that he’ll put his care and concerns behind him to go back to music and the Eurovision message. But of course, this is a satire, and it sends the message that though Eurovision (and others) would like him to just not give a shit about Eurovision’s corruption and go back to being involved with him, that’s ridiculous and he won’t do it.

And now the verse has shifted from anger at and critique of Eurovision in the first two lines, to indifference and engagement with Eurovision in the last two, as Joost now aligns with Eurovision’s hypocritical message and wants to “buy a Samsung in the Apple Store”

VERSE 2: TOMMY CASH

“I'm not a good rapper, that's the reason that I sing (Yeah) I'm not a good singer, that's the reason that I rap (Yeah) I used to love McDonald’s, but I'm never going back I know that I'm white, but I wish that I was—”

Aligning with many of the other phrases, the first two lines are a paradox. He’s not a good rapper so he sings, he’s not a good singer so he raps. It could also be getting into him as a musician (I don’t know much about Tommy Cash) maybe people say he’s bad at singing and rapping.

The line on McDonald’s is a reference to the widespread McDonald’s boycott because of the company’s support of the IDF (McDonald’s gave free meals to IDF soldiers during the genocide, and recently the company bought back its Israeli restaurants). It keeps in pattern with his other witty phrases referencing mutual exclusivity: he loves McDonald’s, but he’s never going back. But it also makes me think of the McDonald’s boycott as a means of easy and often performative activism for some. There was such an emphasis on it (not saying you shouldn’t boycott lol) that much more important means of support for the Palestinian people and resistance against the genocide got swept over the rug. A lot of people focused on boycotting McDonald’s because it was easy and relatively simple to them politically (same with Starbucks) but now I’ve seen tons of people stop giving a shit and going back to the places they once claimed to boycott. The next line, “I know that I’m white, but I wish that I was–” does strengthen in my head that he is referencing the performance of the boycott activism. The censored part is obviously “Black,” and might seem like a tone deaf line if you take it at face value. Remember, it’s a satire! Saying that even though you’re white, you wish you were Black is definitely tone deaf and just an incredible misunderstanding of how to advocate for Black people, I bet you can imagine a person in your life who would say those things. That’s the type of person Tommy Cash is making fun of, those people that are all ignorant and lazy in their activism, and don’t actually give a shit and just do it for the external look and reception. I feel like you get a good amount of that lazy Neo-liberal activism from people –would we call them celebrities?– that would have the relative fame to perform at Eurovision and those types of things.

I’m not saying Tommy Cash is taking a hyperspecific stance on how public figures boycott McDonald’s yada-yada, I’m just analyzing the words he sings and bringing up my opinions on what I believe he references. I try not to engage in any of that social celebrity typa stuff, I mostly listen to Punk music, this is a big swerve for me. 

VERSE 3: JOOST

“And do you ever think that the world would be so safe That the people never die and nobody got AIDS I wanna smoke a cigarette, but also hit a vape I like to keep it straight, but I also like it gay”

Joost, in the voice of somebody fully believing in Eurovision and their message, is asking Tommy Cash or the listeners about this peaceful, unified world they’re fighting for. It’s like he’s daydreaming of it. But his (again, not genuine) dream world is kinda funny: “That the people never die and nobody got AIDS.” People are always gonna die, and people have already gotten AIDS. This dream world feels disingenuous, fake, and half-assed. It feels like Eurovision’s message.

He continues with another scenario of wanting it both ways: a cigarette and a vape, keeping it straight but also gay. They’re fun and witty lines!

I almost forgot about the fire music video! As this is all happening, Joost and Tommy Cash are participating in a photoshoot with Dan Koens as a stereotypical big-time photographer. Joost and Tommy are dressed in white and sacred behind a heavenly sky background. At some point, they even release doves (cut to the doves not flying into the air, but on the ground). This is referencing Eurovision’s media work with pumping out photoshoots, and also how they depict the musicians as the saviors and only hope for unity.

OUTRO:

“When I wake up in the morning, I wanna sleep The people need the money — economy Joost Klein, Tommy — that's unity This song is so funny, it's not that deep”

The first two lines are our last paradoxical/oxymoronic phrases, but this time, Joost and Tommy complete each other’s sentences. Everyone understands the reference of waking up in the morning but still wanting to sleep, but maybe this could relate a bit more to their positions as performers in Eurovision. Not wanting to go out and perform on stage, or not wanting to perform as a symbol for Eurovision’s message. But people need the money; their performances all have other people’s money on the line. Pressure to make money for the big people.

Their voices feel more genuine in this outro, compared to the rest of the song. Seems like they’re referencing the unity between themselves (Joost and Tommy Cash), instead of this made up hypocritical BS unity that Eurovision spouts.

They end it off with, “this song is so funny, it's not that deep.” So I’ve got a few ideas on this last line. Some people read it as “oh, don’t analyze the song at all” but that’s dumb. I think it’s more that the stuff they’re making fun of and bringing into discussion, they’re doing it playfully, and don’t want people to act like those are their exact formal opinions and statements on the matter. Sometimes musicians will fully get into the fame and money and stop acting like real people and just a clean puppet for others, while other musicians want to maintain their autonomy and privacy, don’t want to just become a voice to spread somebody else’s message, and have to fight to be treated as people.

In the outro, Tommy Cash is dressed in black robes, and Joost is in white, and they are in the same room of the World Peace Committee (yellow sky background). Joost takes one flower out of the bouquet in Tommy’s arms and places a flower into the barrel of the giant tank. The image is a reference to the famous photograph Flower Power by Bernie Boston. The photograph shows a protester placing a flower into the barrel of a soldier’s rifle at a protest against the Vietnam War.

This barrel is aiming straight at Joost, and he braces as the tank shoots him. He falls to the ground, and his blood forms a heart around his head. Tommy gets onto the floor with him, and their black and white robes form the Yin-Yang symbol. 

I would say the tank is the World Peace Committee’s, as it takes place in the same room as the intro. Isn’t it ironic that the committee for PEACE, LOVE, and UNITY has got such a big tank? Joost’s placing the flower in the barrel was another act of peace against violence, the same way he spoke for peace out of a place of care against violence. But Joost has gone against the Committee/EBU, so now they aim their tank at him. Very much a reference to how Eurovision turned on him, and absolutely abandoned him, at a moment’s notice.

The Yin and Yang symbol is big in Taoism. The black and the white represent opposing but complementary forces. Duality duality. I think that the Yin-Yang symbol showcases too much genuine complexity and interconnection to refer to the political message of Eurovision, and Eurovision is just BS. Maybe it references the quality of Tommy and Joost’s friendship, specifically in relation to Eurovision? I’m still thinking about it.

Looking back, I think I missed the angle of the public’s treatment of their opinions, so I might add to that later.

Let me know what you think!

[iamfuckhead]

"Good Good Things" isn't romantic

People act like this song is all romantic, but I think it's meant to display a very superficial relationship. Do you see what I see???

So come on down and walk with me, and tell me I'm your man I only want to know a couple of things about you

The speaker is depicted as just interested in being called someone’s “man” he specifically just wants that romantic identifier. He only wants to know a couple of things about the girl, he isn’t interested truly in who she is, just this dynamic of being her man and being in a relationship. It’s superficial.

Where were you when I was in so much trouble with myself? And do you still believe in me like I believe?

He sees this girl as an answer to his problems, maybe problems about self esteem? Almost blaming. He seems self-conscious that she doesn’t “believe” in him and will leave him.

I've been thinking good, good things about you Cool and warm, good, good things about you If you've been thinking good, good things about me

This part seems sweet on its own, but with the rest of the lyrics I don’t read it that way. “Good, good things” is pretty vague, “good” and “things” I feel it only stresses the superficiality of this romance. We have this motif of “cool” and “warm” throughout the song, a contrast. Some kinda conflict in the relationship or within the speaker. First verse, “Cooling my blood, warming my heart” hmmm odd image. Maybe it means this relationship is emotionally fulfilling in some way, he thinks this is what he wants and it’s making him happy, but it’s “cooling [his] blood,” I can only think of reptiles and how “cold-blooded” is used. This relationship is also just making him emotionally callous, probably because it’s not real. He’s thinking “cool and warm” things about the girl, he’s conflicted with her and how he feels about her. and! We get an “If” in the start of the third line. “If you’ve been thinking, good, good things about me” what is this if attached to? The lines above. The speaker is only thinking all of these good things about the girl if she also is. He seems so dependent on feeling attraction and care for her only if she also is. Hmmmmmmmm.

On my own, I know where you go

So when the speaker is alone, not with his girlfriend, he is saying he knows where she goes, as if where she goes is some sort of secret. Maybe when he’s not with his girl she’s cheating on him, but he knowsss. It could be real unfaithfulness or just what he’s thinking, but there’s jealousy and turbulence.

Living the lie, in your eyes

They’re living a lie of this superficial romance, and it’s emphasized how it’s in the girls eyes. Yknow staring into someone’s eyes all romantic, but this romantic environment they’re in is one of a lie.

Let's see if I can get it right with you this time around I'm not afraid of losing you, my little girl But do you still believe in me like I believe?

So we wants to get it right this time around, meaning they’ve broken up before. The “let’s see” is so flippant, when if you truly cared for somebody you’d be so dedicated to doing it right! He even says, “I’m not afraid of losing you” he’s trying to display himself as not super interested in keeping her and getting her back. key word, “display.” The speaker, and probably his girlfriend too, are in this weird performance of caring and uncaring all based on the other’s level of care. It just feels spiteful. It’s an act of this uncaring macho man. “Little girl” is kinda weird too. I think it adds to this image of who the speaker is trying to act like, and addressing his girlfriend as a “little girl” only emphasizes this dynamic he wants. But then he goes back to this insecurity, because he needs reassurance from her that she still believes in him. It’s ironic!

I’d say this song isn’t meant to be romantic, it’s just showing a superficial relationship that only acts, mainly, to make the speaker feel better about himself. He wants to be her man, he wants to be in a relationship, he wants to be all strong and tough enough that he doesn’t care about his girlfriend, he wants her to be the little girl in comparison to him. He wants this relationship because he’s deeply insecure in himself. He’s just performing. It reminds me of Drain You a bit.

I don’t think this song is from the perspective of Bill Stevenson, it’s clearly very self-aware and intentional in its irony. But yes I don’t read it as romantic. It’s still a classic and I think the song’s absolutely wonderful, and I don’t think it not being romantic should take away any real enjoyment or be in conflict with the awesomeness of the song.

Example of a foolish misinterpreter: