• SCB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    The song is not about “rich men” in general but about politicians in Washington DC. Those are, specifically, the “rich men north of Richmond” he is discussing.

    His claim is not that business owners pay too little, but that the government is taking too much, and giving it to welfare queens.

    You may want to consider reading the actual lyrics.

    • luckyhunter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Yes that is one of the things he talks about, among many. funny enough he only mentions the word politician once when talking about miners and doesn’t call them rich men. almost as if he wrote the song that way on purpose. Which is why it’s so damn popular with people of all classes, colors, and political leanings.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        He mentions politicians every time the chorus comes around. That is what “rich men north of Richmond” means. That’s why he isn’t calling out wealthy people south of Richmond. DC is north of Richmond.

        I can’t tell you why the song is popular, but I can definitely parse the meaning of the lyrics, which you seem to be struggling with.

        These rich men north of Richmond

        Lord knows they all just wanna have total control

        Wanna know what you think, wanna know what you do

        And they don’t think you know, but I know that you do

        'Cause your dollar ain’t shit and it’s taxed to no end

        Cause of rich men north of Richmond

        This is explicitly about politicians. The entire song is.

        The only other lyrics with any content are

        Well, God, if you’re 5-foot-3 and you’re 300 pounds Taxes ought not to pay for your bags of fudge rounds Young men are puttin’ themselves six feet in the ground ‘Cause all this damn country does is keep on kickin’ them down

        Lambasting “welfare queens” and taxes.

        Needless to say, this song isn’t popular with me, because I am capable of understanding both the lyrics and how taxes and welfare work within the context of the economy.

        At no point does he decry wealthy business owners or anything of the sort, which sort of takes away from your “any political leanings” argument. This is very explicitly one political leaning, and from a person who isn’t very knowledgeable.

        • luckyhunter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          As i said in my comment, he mentions politicians 1 time. You can’t think of any other rich cities north or Richmond? Because i can think of a couple. If you choose to read between the lines and interpret it in only a way that you don’t like, then that’s on you.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            10 months ago

            Those rich cities aren’t taxing people.

            This is just basic understanding of verse man, not sure how else to help you. You are absolutely incorrect here.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                They aren’t taxing people where he lives. I suppose it was wrong of me to assume you’d understand that since these lyrics are challenging for you.

                • luckyhunter@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  That’s the cool thing about music. The song isn’t just about him and where he lives. it can be about anyone, anywhere. Art is hard though, I know.

                  • SCB@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    Art can be interpreted, yes, but if I look at a picture of the Mona Lisa and think it is an excellent painting of a duck, I am incorrect.

                    There is, in fact, a correct way to interpret poetry and verse. I should know, because I literally have a degree in it and used to teach high school English.

                    The specifics of this song are not open to interpretation - it is a song about how the federal government gives “hard working men’s” tax dollars to “undeserving” people on welfare.

                    By the same token, Taylor Swift’s “Cruel Summer” is not about global warming.

                    It’s okay to be wrong and it is a sign of self-confidence and intelligence to accept when you are wrong.

                    You can still enjoy the song if the actual meaning makes you feel good, or even if you just think it’s a banger. No one is trying to take that from you.