Martial industrial as a genre has always, from the onset, been controversial. Neofolk too, to an extreme extent. However, in many ways, martial industrial is a far more niché genre than neofolk; the latter has throughout the years both conceptually and aesthetically expanded, and also become diluted by only nominally linked artists appropriating the name. As such, in some ways, martial industrial remains closer to the core of controversy inherent in both genres.

If you’re familiar even with the biggest names in the genre only, you will know what controversy I speak of. It is, of course, the liberal, pronounced and even exaggerated use of militaristic and/or politically extremist, often totalitarian, imagery in both the aesthetics and lyrical content.

I’ve often heard someone remark that they like the music, but the aesthetic alienates them. In this text I will argue that this aesthetic is, in fact, a quintessential aspect of martial industrial. Without it, martial industrial would not exist.

It is absolutely true that the usage of fascist and totalitarian imagery in martial industrial is overdone, often to the point of being ridiculous. There’s scarcely anything original or inventive in digging up whatever as-of-yet unused name of some obscure Italian or French or Hungarian (or whatever) fascist grouping from the 1930’s, naming one’s project after it and using suitably controversial but ultimately non-committal imagery from some historical photo archive for album covers.

Within the context of martial industrial, from the viewpoint of an insider, there’s nothing shocking, controversial or provocative in it anymore. Triarii, Arditi and dozens of others already did it better. But for outsiders, this flirting with extremism is of course an endless source of consternation – and understandably so. It is all about dipping one toe in some very forbidden waters. Usually accompanied by pre-emptive statements of one’s project not being political and only using the imagery for historical purposes.

This is a way to signal insidership, of knowing the “secret code” of martial industrial. And regardless of whether it is done unwittingly, or because one does what the pioneers have done before, or because of an innate understanding of the ambiguity and friction at the heart of martial industrial, or even because of explicit political convictions, these all play into that very ambiguity and friction.

Industrial music was always meant to be abrasive, both musically and thematically. It was meant to explore uncomfortable, controversial and forbidden concepts, thoughts and ideas. It was meant to take listeners into some very uncomfortable places and give no easy answers; to question and even break taboos.

After all, one of the roles of art is to force the audience to think. Political propaganda will give pre-digested truths and answers. Art is allowed confront the audience with difficult concepts and force them to do the work; unquestionably, art should rather do that than provide ready answers.

In industrial, this meant the political inflammability of Genocide Organ as well as the sexual transgressivity of Sutcliffe Jügend. It meant Laibach’s ambiguous homilies to totalitarian politics. Industrial music took the artistic liberty of using controversial imagery ambiguously to extremes equaling that of the music.

As martial industrial evolved, it forsook almost completely the perversion, sexual excess and graphic violence of power electronics, moving away from the purely personal toward the collective, towards the past itself. With a rather crystallized focus, the genre turned its eye towards militarism, totalitarism and the philosophers who explored themes of culture, power and identity in ways that sometimes were adjacent to totalitarian ideology.

With their origins in the 1980’s, martial industrial and neofolk called into question established historical narratives of a Europe still grappling with the long shadow of the era of fascism. Was the evil truly vanquished, as we were taught in school? Does the shadow still linger in a cultural subconscious? At the same time, it crucially identified an innate attraction to totalitarian and authoritarian ideas in us – one that transcends political and ideological affiliations. We shall return to this later.

The ambiguity at the heart of martial industrial is the very artistic freedom mentioned above. Granted, I would be surprised if half of the latter day projects rehashing and regurgitating the same aesthetic blueprint as earlier projects realize this. But, ultimately, it doesn’t matter. Either way, this ambiguity is at the existential core of martial industrial.

In a very significant way, the listener needs to have a certain uncertainty about the ulterior motives of the artists. Is the flirtation with totalitarian imagery subversive commentary? Is it fetishism? Is it soulless imitation of an established aesthetic? Or it is entirely sincere political conviction? This forces the listener to confront themselves and go toe-to-toe with their own shadow; that aforementioned part of them that is fascinated by totalitarianism. Martial industrial, often even when it does not do so intentionally, realizes one of the roles of art, that of a mirror to the audience.

The moral ambiguity creates a tension and friction, not only in the music, but above all in the audience. Many will be willfully oblivious or apathetic to this and just enjoy the “naughty imagery”, but the discerning listener will on some level recognize this irreconcilable tension, a subsumed current that has the potential to be deeply disconcerting. It engages the listener in ways some more simplified form of music – for example, punk with its lyrically rather simplistic and catchy sloganeering – won’t. The ambiguities force the listener to resolve them themselves, conscious of that the conclusions they reach will be deeply subjective, not absolute or even necessarily correct.

I’m fairly certain most martial industrial projects toying with extreme imagery aren’t in fact die-hard totalitarians or fascists. It’s edgy and scene appropriate imagery for most. Many artists have from time to time hinted at personal opinions that are polar opposites to the imagery, implying an ulterior motive of subversive commentary. Artists like Ordo Rosarious Equilibrio intertwine the typical neofolk/martial industrial aesthetic with explicitly sexual concepts, adding a firm layer of fetishism. And of course, metaphysical traditionalism and questions of identity in the style of perennialist philosophers can be separated from political extremism. But, undeniably, there will always be a slice of the scene that uses totalitarian imagery absolutely earnestly, reflecting their political convictions.

When it comes to individual artists, the audience can and even should condemn those who represent something the audience finds reprehensible. This is, in a way, the audience’s responsibility not to the artist, but to art itself. However, one should have an innate understanding of the very ambiguity discussed above, and avoid jumping the gun. When is a spade really a spade, when it comes to martial industrial (and industrial, in a larger context)?

It is also important to understand that, in contradiction to the above, martial industrial as a genre, not as individual artists, needs this spectrum of ambiguity. To put it simply, one need not accept bona fide fascists in the scene, but the possibility of real totalitarian ideas is part of what gives martial industrial the quintessential friction and layer of uncertainty that authentically challenges the listener. There needs to be an element of danger, of authentically questionable content – even if it is mostly hypothetical. This is what places responsibility on the discerning listener to inform themselves and make educated decisions on what artists to support and where to draw lines. This is what forces the listener to confront their own shadow, their own fascination with the subject.

As mentioned earlier, a certain fascination with totalitarian thought and extremism is built in into most of us. That doesn’t mean there’s a small fascist in us, waiting to take the reins as soon as the opportunity presents itself. There’s just something inexplicably fascinating in cults of power, in authoritarian and militant aesthetics. There’s also something morbidly fascinating in violence, terror and horrible crimes. The popularity of both true crime and holocaust literature prove this. There is a shadow to humanity.

Acknowledging this, and even to some extent indulging it, does not – or at least should not – necessarily lead to an acceptance and adoption of totalitarian traits in oneself. It is acknowledging a possibly unflattering but still very human trait, one we cannot easily explain or square away. Most of us will avoid it entirely, some will seek to compartmentalize it into something essentially harmless like true crime. Few confront it head on, which is exactly what martial industrial forces us to do. And yes, one can oppose totalitarianism, extremism, fascism and authoritarianism and still acknowledge this side to us; it could even be argued, that first one must face this aspect and make some kind of tenuous peace with it.

From my experience, beneath the surface aesthetics (which we’ve discussed above), authoritarianism and totalitarianism do not seem to be popular among martial industrial artists. A certain degree of political conservatism and traditionalism is, but these are a long way from explicit totalitarianism and extremism. Perhaps in part due to convention, in part because the artists realize the necessity of the above mentioned ambiguity, few martial industrial artists will reduce their art to ideological sloganeering. My assessment is that a great many of the more informed and contextually aware musicians in martial industrial use their music and its aesthetics as a means to confront and enter into dialogue with this shadow mentioned above, to force themselves onto uncertain ground.

And, yes, I do understand why some people outside of the scene find this ambiguity problematic and would hope for more absolute stances. It would make the music easier to peg, and make it less confronting, less disturbing, if martial industrial were clear cut either way – either for or against.

But it would rob martial industrial of one of it’s vital strengths.

At the very core of the genre is always the question: “What do they mean by this?” But there are precious few easy answers to be found. There are ambiguities, allusions and fragments to piece together. It’s a form of music that, in the best of cases, places a big responsibility on the audience. It unbares uncomfortable and controversial tendencies in us, morbid fascinations with a negative shadowside clad in symbols and imagery most in our culture will inherently recognize as such.

Art is allowed to be disturbing. It is allowed to be harrowing. It is allowed to be controversial. It’s not required to give easy and simple solutions. At the heart of martial industrial is an uncertainty and ambiguity, of controversial aesthetics used in ambiguous ways. In this sense, it is art in its purest form, even when its creators are unaware of it.

Martial industrial is meant to make you ask questions of yourself.