Bruce Springsteen went straight into politics on stage in the United States this spring and now says he feels “good” about the backlash over the outspoken message of his latest tour, even as his bandmate Stevie Van Zandt spoke of death threats and heightened security measures.
77-year-old Springsteen spoke about this. Rolling Stone that its recent Land of hopes and dreams the concerts were a tour he wanted to do, and that the angry reaction to its political content was just part of the deal.
Springsteen has spent much of his career weaving social commentary into his music, but this series of concerts was decidedly more overt than coded. The artist used the tour to deliver a straightforward political narrative and, during a performance in New York, harshly criticized US President Donald Trump from the stage before walking onto the set. This shift from proposals to harsh rhetoric has pleased some fans and angered others, especially among some of President Trump’s supporters.
Bruce Springsteen is doubling down on his vision for a political tour
Springsteen described Rolling Stone how deliberately he built Land of hopes and dreams show. He said he felt compelled to tell a specific story each night instead of relying on the familiar greatest hits format.
“This was the show I wanted to make, the story I wanted to tell,” he said. He acknowledged that some people were “furious about the content of the show” but added that such reactions were simply “the way the chips are falling” and that “I’m okay with that right now.”
There was a dryness in the way he formulated this position. With more than fifty years on the road under his belt, Springsteen suggested that age had given him the freedom to follow his instincts without worrying too much about who might be headed for the exit. This looks less like a radical reimagining and more like a continuation of the way he’s always worked, but with a political twist.
Springsteen presented the tour as an extension of his artistic and political beliefs, rather than an attempt to keep every audience on his side. What was different about this tour was the extent to which it addressed contemporary political events directly from the stage, rather than leaving listeners to decipher the metaphors later at home.
Bruce Springsteen: Security concerns and long-standing politics
The contrast on this tour is particularly striking given the long-running debate about how Born in USA has been interpreted, sometimes completely at odds with Springsteen’s own explanation of the song. This time there was much less room for misunderstanding where he stood.
Instagram/Springsteen
For context, the reaction was not limited to grumbling on social media. E Street Band guitarist Stevie Van Zandt said the tour’s sensitive political themes coincided with an increase in hostile messages and what he called direct death threats against band members.
Speaking about the atmosphere on the road, Van Zandt said the shows “were a little different because of the strict security.” He noted the “very specific political theme” permeating the set and said there were “a lot of threats, death threats.” Some degree of hostility is normal, he said, but “it’s intensifying” this time.
The FBI was reportedly concerned about these threats as security was heightened during the tour. Van Zandt did not provide figures on the number or origin of the alleged threats, and IBTimes UK was unable to independently verify their scope. Van Zandt said the FBI and others are monitoring the situation and that additional security measures are in place to ensure the safety of fans.
Despite this, Springsteen continued with the tour’s overtly political messages. The set remained structured around the same storyline and the commentary remained in place even as security concerns grew.
Bruce Springsteen’s Trumpian throwback and the rock world’s fight back
Let’s remember that Springsteen also used his opening remarks at the New York show to sharply criticize Trump and his administration. Before the band began playing, Springsteen told the audience that “our democracy, our constitution, our rule of law is being challenged now more than ever by a reckless, racist, incompetent, treasonous president and his administration, ship of fools.”
These were the words Springsteen spoke from a microphone to thousands of paying fans. The remarks drew strong backlash, with supporters applauding his outspokenness and critics accusing him of turning a rock concert into a political rally.
Springsteen also urged the audience to resist division and support democratic institutions, including a call for civic engagement in his pre-show message.
Not everyone in the rock community applauded this approach. Journey keyboardist Jonathan Kane criticized Springsteen’s political speeches, saying that musicians should focus on their art and stating that he prefers to avoid politics in his performances.
Rolling Stones frontman Mick Jagger has also said that his role during live concerts is to entertain people, not lecture them on politics. He said concertgoers should be able to have a good time and forget about their problems, rather than listen to lectures.
These controversies lead to a pressing question in popular music: whether artists owe audiences a largely politics-free space or an honest reflection of the times, even if that honesty manifests itself in controversy, tight security and harsh words for the president.