In its most basic definition, Punk music is a manifestation of the rebellious, anti-authority punk subculture that peaked in the second half of the 1970s, primarily in the US and the UK.Not just a music genre, but punk is more of an attitude, a philosophy, and a whole way of being.
Sure it doesn't sound like punk music, but they sure as hell ripped a massive middle finger at authority.
It's worth noting that the act has been criticized by Malasia's queer community as exacerbating tensions and reinforcing negative stereotypes. I don't have a strong opinion but it's generally best to listen to the concerns of the community you're trying to stick up for before doing a political stunt on their behalf (I'm queer btw)
It's almost like any kind of advocacy done in name of a marginalized group without actually including and consulting said group is performative, masturbatory and counterproductive.
This applies to most things well-meaning "progressive" libs choose to champion: race, indigenous peoples, immigrants, you name it.
The guitarist, Matty Healy, is a racist piece of shit and nothing he ever does is punk. He masturbates to black women being degraded and dehumanized. Fuck him and fuck anyone bringing him or his band up.
Punk is a musical tradition. Rock and roll was always about rebellion. What made punk different was the back to basic, do it yourself attitude to the music. It's rebellion, not only against society, but also against increasingly polished music in the 70s with everyone trying to be Zeppelin.
It arguably started with the Dolls and the Stooges, and grew like wildfire in CBGB. It spread to England when forming members of the Clash and Sex Pistols attended a single Ramones show. It got commercialised through the Pistols and political through the Clash. It got hardened in California, from Black Flag to the Kennedys. The US saw an inspired hardcore scene for a few years.
After that I'd argue it died. Plenty of people would probably pour a beer over me for that.
If it doesn't draw from this musical tradition at all, calling it punk is just completely misleading. Ray Charles wasn't punk just because he refused to play for a segregated audience. He was a complete badass, but that's a different thing entirely. And even when drawing from punk as a tradition, whether or not post punk and pop punk should be considered punk is already a debate not worth having.
If you've heard their work, and understood who wrote it, you would know that Matty Healy is not a white supremacist. He's just a fucking idiot with a shit sense of humor. Kinda tired of people framing people as extremists when they made a few problematic remarks on a couple podcasts at worst.
And how exactly am I admiring this band? I had never heard of these guys before the news story, and I agree this Healy dude sounds like a dickhead. I was simply asking a question about the band and punk movement.
Ok, ill give you the benefit of the doubt and explain it to you as best as I can: Being a personification of White Nationalism is not punk and is not ripping a massive middle finger at authority, it simply is being a Nazi. And as such, he deserves no admiration and no discussion. The only thing he deserves is a massive ripping of his middle frontal gyrus.