If you were to sum up the core tenet of what it is to identify as a punk, to boil it down to some general concepts and buzzwords, what would it/they be? I’m pretty sure that whatever your punk persuasion, you’re likely to say something along the lines of rebellion and/or being anti-authority as being central to the ideology of punk. The latter is something I have seen a lot of on social media in particular- comments admonishing people for various stances that signify conformity to ‘the man’ or don’t display the required ‘burn it all down’ nihilistic attitude that some associate with punk. You certainly aren’t going to find many (any) punks who will say “I love the government and being told how to live my life”.
But what does being anti-authority mean? As a term it is pretty generic- it could go off in few different directions. It can imply a sophisticated belief system that ruminates on the inherent power dynamics within hierarchical structures- the more anarchist basis of being anti-authority. It could also mean something more petulant- a ‘don’t tell me what to do’ attitude, a blanket ‘hackles up’ response to any perceived instruction or demand. Or it is the self-imposed, grandiose term for basically, internet trolls and very unpleasant people, the ‘authority’ they are ‘anti’ being any sense of manners, empathy, compromise or decency (people who think they’re outlaws because they’re mean or contrary on the internet). Or….it means fuck all and is a just a term bandied around and doesn’t really require further analysis.
Punk’s placement on this spectrum is well and truly with the first option- more anti-authoritarian than just anti-authority, an imperative to remain sceptical of any means of oppression and be wary of infringement on freedom and liberation. At least it is to me. But over the years I’ve encountered more and more rhetoric that falls into the last 2 categories. Rebels without a clue. Meanness dressed up in a freedom fighter’s garb.
The very broad question of what punk is (beyond the music) is something that could fill a book (and has in fact filled many books already)! Even trying to pin down the exact music that can be called punk is a bit of a minefield. In fact, most debates I have ended up drafted into about what punk is, have actually been conversations that started by arguing about what punk ISN’T.
And it is these conversations that I have seen the ‘punk anti-authority’ message trotted out the most recently. But not in the way you’d think.
Here are some things I have seen labelled as ‘not punk’:
- Saying you are punk
- Having a mohawk/Not having a mohawk
- Liking the Sex Pistols/Not liking the Sex Pistols
- Trying to learn an instrument
- Signing a petition
- Manners
- Being anti-racist in light of the recent riots in the UK
In fact, it was that last point that brought this back onto my radar. The response that I had seen when some punk bands or individuals were expressing their disgust at the display of racism taking place on Britain’s streets was very disappointing. Encouraging the punk community to organise and mobilise to show solidarity with those who were feeling threatened, intimidated or unwelcome because of their ethnicity would be- you would think- a pretty basic punk activity. It’s solidarity with the oppressed, and an opposition to displays of neo-fascism on our streets. But that was not the 100% consensus amongst people who claim some knowledge of or ownership over the term ‘punk’. [I will caveat that the majority of the punk scene was of course looking to offer support to anti racism efforts, I’m talking about a subset of people who were not]. It was posited by some that real punk goes against the grain; it takes an opposition to prevailing norms and sides with whatever is most disruptive and aggravating to authorities. So, that would mean supporting the riots or at least not opposing them- instead, revel in the lawlessness. This is not a super new thing- I’ve noticed this trajectory over the last few years.
When punk bands or fans have expressed support for Palestine amidst the Israeli offensive, there’s been a slurry of responses to say that this is NOT a punk position to take, because the establishment is taking that position and therefore it is more rebellious to take an opposing view. What that has to do with the inherent morality of a situation is anyone’s guess and also most authorities are actually in support of Israel or at least not expressing overt support for the Palestinian cause. So that doesn’t work either.
When claiming to be ‘anti-authority’, it is not entirely specific which authority you are supposed to be ‘anti’. Is it the police, the criminal justice system, the military, the government? Is it literally anything they say or do even if they may be acting in a way we inherently agree with (even a stopped clock is right twice a day)? Does it filter down to being anti teachers, anti parents? What if you have a nice teacher who works long hours for dismal pay and is dedicating their life to educating children and young people? Are we just ‘anti’ them for the sake of it?
This is my issue with a generic term like being ‘anti authority’ that is not anchored in a specific value or issue. In many corners it just seems to be an anti ‘woke’ thing, the insinuation being that ‘woke’ is the new authority and therefore this should be resisted. This is demonstrated by the quote from Sex Pistols and PiL frontman John Lydon:
“I never thought I’d live to see the day when the right wing would become the cool ones giving the middle finger to the establishment, and the left wing becoming the sniveling self-righteous twatty ones going around shaming everyone”. He has also shown support for Trump, saying he had ‘love’ for the former President:
“I’m anti politicians, and I always have been,” Lydon exclusively told Far Out. “Every single one of them is a liar. This is where my love for [Donald] Trump comes from, he was not a politician at all in any way. And he threw an anarchistic spanner in the works and shook them all up.”
OK, so anti-politician then? Not anti-elite, ‘wouldn’t piss on you if you were on fire’ types though…with that logic you would back a multi millionaire businessman over a politician, even if that politician was genuinely trying to enact positive change for the world? How does that as a general principle make for a coherent position? Again, it lacks any kind of sophistication.
On a punk social media page that shared an anti Trump message this year, it was met with comments that voting for any candidate is not punk and should not be endorsed or encouraged. I completely accept that some may view any engagement with the political system as being against more anarcho-punk principles (I’ve already written about this) but is that the reason behind the comments? In some cases yes and some no. Some just wanted to be contrary and controversial.
A widely shared image online of a list of bigoted positions that rule you out of identifying as punk is routinely met with comments like “telling people what to think is not punk”, “way to rebel- telling people what to do” etc etc… the sentiment doesn’t seem to matter, it’s purely about taking opposition for opposition’s sake. Similarly, when JK Rowling declared being transphobic ‘the new punk’ someone was prompted to say: “Punk is anarchy. Punk is nihilistic. Punk is destructive. Punk is rebellion. It has absolutely nothing to do with positive anything. And fuck off with ‘inclusivity’”. Well random Twitter user, I beg to differ. Joey Ramone himself said:
“It’s not about, ‘Yeah, I am a punk and I’m angry. ‘ That’s a lot of crap. It’s about loving the things that really matter: passion, heart and soul.”
Joe Strummer uttered the most impactful summary of what punk is and it wasn’t destruction and negativity, quite the opposite: “punk rock is exemplary manners to your fellow human beings”.
Deciding to be in opposition to any form of authority as the overarching principle, is surely a constantly moving goal post? If it is not underpinned by more consistent values then it is not politically subversive in any way- it is just self indulgently performative and meaningless.
Punk is not explicitly just hating the government. It’s hating/ fighting against the use of oppression by an authority, and throughout punk there has been a clear understanding that there are specific things to fight for, and specific things to fight against. A brief jaunt through the main roads of punk history would back the assertion that punk was anti the establishment, but only because it has been shit. The 1980s American punks were railing against the Reagan White House, the rise of Christian Nationalism, police brutality, neoliberal economics- actual ideologies or cultural ills that could be defined and identified. The 90s riot grrrls were fighting attacks on reproductive rights, lack of equality, violence perpetrated against them that went unchallenged by authorities. There was a more tangible purpose and focus on what authorities were doing wrong and the real life impact this had on often very marginalised people.
In my book ‘Rebel Grrrls- The Story of Women and Punk’ (out in 2025) I spoke to dozens of punk fans who are clear that punk gave them the ability to question the wisdom of authorities and elders and think for themselves. Many were inspired to use their skills, education and hearts to pursue careers or activities that made a difference to people’s lives, to mitigate the negative impacts of the structures we live in- capitalist, patriarchal, white supremacist structures. Those are high-level authorities that dictate all of our lives and these are the ones punks should be against.
I have absolutely no issue with being anti authority ( I would class myself as anti authority) and I do think it is a core part of the punk legacy and ideology, but not just as an empty slogan. Anti authority/authoritarianism is such because it recognises the harm that unchecked authority has on the majority of society, especially those who might be vulnerable or marginalised. THAT’S why punks take that position, not to avoid taking any responsibility for their own role in society and certainly not to ‘own the libs’ online. Then you are confusing punk with being a knobhead.
Pic credits: Lucas van Oort (main pic), Orit Matee (anarchy symbol), Jonathan Harrison (punk and police), Molly Tie (Sex Pistols posters). All pics taken from Unsplash.