USA

Interview with Kurt Schroeder

Kurt Schroeder has been involved in the US straight edge scene for roughly two decades. In the early 90s, he co-founded Catalyst Records, a label that has fused the 1990s vegan straight edge scene with a broad radical agenda, including the fight against sexism, racism, and homophobia. Catalyst describes itself as “a label that still believes that hardcore is as much about communication, hopes and ideals as it is about music.” It has released bands like Birthright, Gather, and Point of No Return, and has turned into an international hub for politically oriented straight edge hardcore.

It always seemed to me that the 1990s vegan straight edge movement was a politically curious phenomenon. On the one hand there was definitely a genuine intention to fight cruelty and suffering and make the world a better place—on the other hand there was self-righteousness, puritan ethics, and political conservatism. The line between these two sides often seemed very thin; so thin that many progressive-minded drug-free kids distanced themselves from the straight edge movement as a whole. It seems that Catalyst Records was an attempt to keep progressive politics in the movement. Would you agree with this perception? Tell us a little about the label’s history and its political aspirations.

At the very least I can say that Catalyst Records was formed as a way to promote ideas and bands with a strong message within the straight edge scene. As time went on this definitely progressed as my own understanding and political awareness progressed. From the beginning I believed that straight edge was a revolutionary concept, and saw it in that framework, as opposed to those who did—and many who still do—see it in a more fundamentalist/conservative light.

This was compounded by the introduction to the ethic of veganism into the straight edge scene, and my own involvement in living vegan and my introduction to other fundamental concepts such as feminist principles.

As far as aspirations go, they are basically the same as they were at the start: to present other options, to promote critical thinking, and to help out bands that support similar ideas.

How did this play out for you? Did you feel that you got your message across, or was this a frustrating venture at times?

It can definitely be frustrating, especially when there is a totally anti-progressive current in the hardcore scene, depending on what is popular at the time. However, I feel like as long as I continue to stay true to the goals of the label and do things on my own terms, the label is successful. The point has never been to be big, to make money, or to be most popular, but to continue to provide an alternative voice in the context of the hardcore scene.

How would you say that the scene has generally reacted to Catalyst and its bands? Did you ever feel isolated or was there always a sense of respect even from folks who did not share your political commitments?

The reaction the label and the bands we work with receive is often really dependent on the flavour of the current hardcore scene. This scene goes through phases and cycles, and the whole point of the label is to remain steady and to not follow trends. With that said, there are most definitely times when Catalyst Records seems a little out of place in the overall hardcore scene, especially when the scene is at its least progressive. Fortunately there seems to have been a big resurgence in more progressive/vegan/intelligent hardcore in the past five years or so, and a growth of people interested in critical thinking and in the underground/DIY hardcore scene in general.

On the other side of things, for a time there was a noticeable backlash against political and vegan bands, and I think this attitude remains to a great extent in the more “mainstream” portion of the hardcore and straight edge scenes today.

Let’s go back to the scene of the 1990s: one thing that always bothered me was that some of the most popular vegan straight edge bands did not draw stronger lines between themselves and the sometimes frighteningly conservative tendencies within hardline—especially militant anti-abortion attitudes or blatant homophobia. Like, I had a feeling that even though some of these bands never actively endorsed such views, they didn’t take strong enough stances against them either. Does this resonate with you in some way?

I think a lot of the attitude you are referring to is just a product of the huge influence that hardline and hardline bands had on the vegan straight edge movement in the beginning. Most of the vegan bands in the hardcore scene either had members who were hardline (or paid lip-service to the ideology), or were influenced by earlier hardline bands. At the time it was just an inherent part of what was going on, the movement was very new, and there were very few bands or zines that were presenting an alternative view.

I think this has changed to some extent as the movement has continued to mature and grow, to incorporate new ideas, and to rely less upon the more puritanical influences.

When one checks the Catalyst forum today—arguably a focal point for political straight edge debates, at least in the US, but internationally too—animal rights issues remain very prominent, and there are discussions about racism and sexism. Other issues relevant to radical politics like, say, workers’ struggles, are almost completely absent. Do you see this as a problem? I mean, you’re familiar with the critique of (vegan) straight edge being a “middle class” movement, etc...

As far as the common subjects of the forum goes, I don’t really put too much thought into it, primarily because it is a message board, and I don’t really have any kind of high expectations—even though I think it does operate on a different level than most other forums.

I do think that those subjects—animal rights, for example—are more prevalent. I would just guess that they are the issues that many of the participants are the most well-versed in and that most of the users have in common.

Of course vegan straight edge is mostly a middle class movement, there is no getting around that. Hardcore itself is a primarily middle class phenomenon. I think we just have to understand that many progressive movements are essentially middle class, accept it and keep trying to move forward. I think there are a lot of cultural factors that maintain the ability for people of relative privilege to get involved in such ideologies, and I’m not sure how to effectively expand the base to individuals of different socio-economic backgrounds.

Do you think that geography also plays a role here? I mean, it seems to be a common perception that political straight edge bands in Europe or Latin America are often more tied into “socialist,” “leftist” or “class” politics, because such aspects are generally more present within countercultural movements, while radical politics in North America are often critiqued for their “lifestyle” character.

I’m sure this is a factor. The political spectrum of the U.S. is definitely more to the right than most of the other countries where hardcore has taken root. In addition there is a strong fundamentalist undercurrent in American culture. I have no doubt that the lack of real information about these subjects in the U.S. has a great effect, and I’m sure that there is a huge difference in both the level of basic education here versus European nations, and also the amount of basic information that Americans receive about the importance of historic socialist/populist movements—these are almost totally absent from any school here.

There has been a long tradition of social conservatism here for over fifty years now, even though it remains detrimental to the majority of the population. I see it as a form of institutionalized social control, and a perpetuation of false consciousness.

Speaking of geography and the international straight edge movement: it is also a commonplace that, compared to North America, straight edge in Europe or Latin America has always been more political, as in: socially aware and tied into wider social movements. Would you share this perception? After all, Catalyst has a rather impressive catalogue of political straight edge bands, many of which hail from the US. But maybe all the political straight edge bands from the US end up on Catalyst and are the exceptions that prove the rule?

I definitely think that Europe and South America have a much more politically-influenced straight edge and hardcore scene, this is really without question. I really think that the abundance of U.S. bands Catalyst released is mostly due to the ease of finding these bands close to home at one point in the label’s history. As the label and the scene expanded, and as I was introduced to more international bands, I think that changed to a great extent. Of the last ten to fifteen releases on Catalyst, around half have been for (or include) non-U.S. bands.

I will say that it can just be much easier to communicate with bands from the same country and who are native speakers of the same language. It is easier to really know what the band is about, to catch their live shows, etc. It’s really not that huge of a barrier at this point, but that, and the amount of vegan straight edge bands that once existed in the U.S. scene, kept the label roster fairly U.S. heavy at the beginning.

Finally, the Catalyst website states that the label is “dedicated to more than just releasing records. Catalyst is also about ideas and the meaning behind the music, such as straight edge, veganism, feminism, the DIY concept, as well as fighting intolerance and injustice.” How are all these aspects connected for you personally?

Personally I believe that there are no separations between all of the struggles listed there, they are all basically intrinsically tied to the same principles: that everyone and every being has the inherent right to live its natural life, free from oppression or unnecessary suffering. I believe that the DIY ethic is a vehicle for this because capitalism is a flawed system at its most basic level, one which cannot function without inequality. Of course I do not operate under the illusion that any of this is perfect, or that I do not contribute in some way to inequality or injustice—this is inevitable for any individual living in this culture—but I, through the label, remain dedicated to presenting alternatives, and promoting the questioning of our current culture and different ways of thinking.