This Ain't Rock 'n' Roll: Pop Music, the Swastika, and the Third Reich

by Daniel Rachel, Billy Bragg (Introduction)

Over the last seven decades, some of rock 'n' roll's most celebrated figureheads have flirted with the imagery and theatre of the Third Reich. From Keith Moon and Vivian Stanshall kitting themselves out in Nazi uniforms to Siouxsie Sioux and Sid Vicious brandishing swastikas in the pomp of punk, generations of performers have associated themselves in troubling ways with the aesthetics, mass hysteria and even ideology of Nazism. Whether shock factor, stupidity, or crass attempt at subversion, rock 'n' roll has indulged these associations in a way not accepted by any other artform.

But how accountable should fans, the media, and the music industry be for what has often seemed a sleazy fascination with the eroticised perversions of a fascist regime?

In This Ain't Rock 'n' Roll, award-winning music historian Daniel Rachel navigates these turbulent waters with extraordinary delicacy and care, asking us to look anew at the artists that have defined us, inspired us and given us joy—and consider why so many have been drawn to the imagery of a movement responsible for the twentieth century's worst atrocities. Alongside a sensitive history of the Holocaust and an examination of the place it holds in our cultural consciousness, Rachel asks essential questions of actions often overlooked or underplayed, whilst neither casting sweeping judgement nor offering easy answers.

In doing so, he asks us to reassess the history of rock 'n' roll and sheds new light on the grim echoes of the Third Reich in popular culture and the legacy of twentieth (and twenty-first) century history as it defines us today.

Genres: Music, Nonfiction, History

336 pages, Hardcover

Published February 10, 2026

About the author

Daniel Rachel is a musician turned award winning and best-selling author. His works include:
Isle of Noises: Conversations with Great British Songwriters (a Guardian and NME Book of the Year),
Walls Come Tumbling Down: the music & politics of Rock Against Racism, 2 Tone and Red Wedge (winner of the Penderyn Music Book prize),
Don’t Look Back in Anger: the Rise & Fall of Cool Britannia (An Evening Standard and Metro Book of the Year),
The Lost Album of The Beatles: What if the Beatles hadn’t Split Up? (Guardian Book Choice)
Too Much Too Young: The 2 Tone Records Story: Rude Boys, Racism and the Soundtrack of a Generation

He has also co-authored
Oasis: Knebworth: Two Nights That Will Live Forever (with Jill Furmanovsky – A Sunday Times Bestseller),
When Ziggy Played the Marquee by Terry O'Neill (editor)
Ranking Roger's autobiography I Just Can't Stop It: My Life in The Beat (a Vive Le Rock Book of the Year).
One For The Road (The Life & Lyrics of Simon Fowler & Ocean Colour Scene)
David Bowie: Icon

HIs latest book, This Ain't Rock 'n' Roll: Pop Music, the Swastika and the Third Reich is published in November 2025

Praise for Isle of Noises

‘Without doubt the finest book I've ever read about songwriters and the songs they write.’ NOEL GALLAGHER

‘I was astounded by Daniel’s knowledge and even after all these years to be asked original questions that surprise you was very impressive.’ ROBIN GIBB

‘It makes for a fascinating read. Especially if you're trying to get a sense of what it takes to write songs.’ ANNIE LENNOX

‘…sometimes you know straightaway if someone’s going to be trotting out the same old stuff. Daniel’s obviously got a real feeling for the esoteric, romantic and spiritual side of it.’ JOHNNY MARR

Reviews

[Garth Jones · Rating 3 out of 5]

All your faves are way more problematic than you knew.

Suffers in the home stretch for absolutely dismissing the genocide in Palestine, with a solitary mention of Zionism and the complete dismissal of, say, Bobby Gillespie’s principled politics.

[Andy Holdcroft · Rating 1 out of 5]

Very disappointing

I was expecting an iluminating & considered examination of the issue. Most of the book was little more than a detailed list of occasions when musicians used Nazi iconography for provocation or thoughtlessly. The author doesn't know why most of them did it so no pattern emerges. Most were pretty misguided & many have apologised or made amends. The hardcore racist music scene where the issue is beyond doubt is almost entirely ignored.

What galls is the heavy Zionist line: even Rock Against Racism is accused of anti-semitism. The later passages equate reasonable support for the Palestinian people & criticism of the current Israeli goovernment with the Nazis. In fact in hindsight, the entire book is a Zionist argument trying to use historical racism as a context.

As it happens, it's so badly written (everything from multiple typos to many obvious factual howlers) that not only was it clearly not researched well nor checked/editted but the "arguments" such as they are carry little weight accordingly.

[Rob Lee · Rating 2 out of 5]

TL,DR: Rock stars who command the adoration of thousands, sometimes feel like Hitler at Nuremberg. Rock stars like to provoke and say tasteless things to generate headlines.

Theres a pearl clutching undercurrent which runs throughout this book, that any artist who dares to even mention anything vaguely Germanic, let alone to do with The Third Reich, must be a paid up nazi.

It’s lacking almost any evaluation or deeper cultural context, simply listing artists, some of whom displayed genuinely worrying predilections for the
Nazis, others whom criticised Israel or used WW2 as inspiration for their songs. Elsewhere. Ian Hunter’s guitar, The Libertines’ “Arbeit Mach Frei”, The Ramones and even Two-Tone, for heavens sake, come in for critique. At the same time, the book barely mentions Industrial music’s long standing neo-nazi problem, NSBM gets a solitary line and there’s no mention of far-right neo-folk at all. (Stewart Home’s “Fascist Yoga” explores Neo-Folk’s fascist tendencies in much more detail.) Far more attention is given to (bad taste) jokes and stupid, drunken pranks than genuine far-right musicians.

When referencing Ice Cube’s clearly antisemitic lyrics, Rachel fails to mention their context in terms of the widespread antisemitism within the Black Power/Nation of Islam movement. It’s also poorly researched; the sections on Charles Manson and Kraftwerk are especially flawed.

A reasonable proportion of the artists who are critiqued here, are in fact Jewish. In the same way it’s not for me as a white British person, to say whether or not Black people should use or reclaim the N-word, I’m not sure its possible for Rachel to suggest that Jewish artists should never be allowed to reclaim/recontextualise/reconfigure anything with Nazi connotations.

The most problematic element of the book is Rachel’s Zionism. Anti-Zionism is not the same as anti-semitism and he completely glosses over Israel’s horrific crimes against the Palestinian people and their illegal occupation of the West Bank, dismissing any critique of the regime as antisemitism.

[Jonas Paro · Rating 3 out of 5]

Artister som flirtat med tredje rikets estetik och uttryck är bland det mest intressanta som finns så den här är såklart väldigt läsvärd. På minussidan hamnar dock några lite väl utsvävande teorier om bland annat Kraftwerks Autobahn.

[Harry · Rating 3 out of 5]

the core content of the book is pretty strong. though quite repetitive to read, I think just providing the sheer quantity of use of nazi tropes is the most effective way of demonstrating a problem. that being said, I think a bit more discussion of lesser known symbols (e.g. 1488, sonnenrand) would be effective, as that is the route a lot of nazi-sympathetic art takes these days

the author seems to view opposition to the state of Israel as evidence for nazi leanings. the way this is done is pretty cowardly. the book is written in 2025, and references events from 2024/25 but the only illusions to the current conflict are criticizing those speaking out against the ongoing genocide. on this issue I'd be more concerned with what human rights organisations around the world are saying, and less concerned with what the bloke from massive attack is saying

given that, I'm a bit disappointed that Billy Bragg wrote an introduction to this book

[Rebecca · Rating 1 out of 5]

Nitpicks about inconsequential things then ignores a genocide

[Brian Shevory · Rating 4 out of 5]

“What do you do when your mom is a skinhead? You write a song about her,” Thurston Moore’s introduction to Sonic Youth’s “The Bedroom”

Big thanks to Akashic Books and NetGalley for the advanced copy of Daniel Rachel’s urgent and critical new book This Ain’t Rock ‘n’ Roll: Pop Music, the Swastika, and the Third Reich. Towards the end of the book, I thought about Thurston Moore’s intro to “The Bedroom,” a song from the early 90s that probably preceded “Youth Against Fascism,” but still emphasized the bands commitment to upholding their values yet also being provocative in their lyrics. I don’t think anyone would accuse SY of holding Nazi sympathies, yet Thurston’s ambivalent delivery leads listeners to wonder whether he’s angry, sad, or maybe even questioning the mother’s skinhead membership. If anything, it’s a kind of absurd premise, but still emphasizes the shock value that permeates the punk ethos from the early days of SY. This song intro nor any of SY’s music made it into this book, but it would have been interesting to read Rachel’s thoughts and questions about SY’s skinhead reference or another reference to Jews in their song “My Arena.” It would have been interesting to see how bands in the 80s, grappling with Reagan, racism, and other inequalities in the US have responded to issues like the resurgence of white supremacy (I’m looking at you Ice-T and Body Count).
If anything, I wonder how much context matters in these kinds of references and whether bands or musicians that referred to Nazi imagery from the UK had a different impact or intent than bands or musicians from the US. I think most people understand that the band Blondie, referenced in the book for some potential Nazi references, are not sympathizers with Nazis, but should we also question other bands from the 1970s like Joy Division or The Fall? Nevertheless, British music is more of the focus of Rachel’s book, and I learned so much from reading this book, both from the bands and the music, as well as the history and details that were relevant to many of the songs, albums, and artwork referenced throughout the book. While I knew about plenty of the bands and the Nazi references that these bands made, I never really considered the deeper implications, especially in how it may have impacted survivors and families who were impacted by the Holocaust. The book covers a lot of obvious candidates from the heyday of British punk like the Sex Pistols (especially Sid Vicious) and Siouxie Sioux, to Factory Records bands like Joy Division and New Order, whose names derive from Nazi references, to some American bands like The Stooges, whose lead guitarist Ron Asheton frequently dressed in SS uniforms and was deeply interested in German war history, and The Ramones, whose logo may have borrowed from the Nazi era eagle. Although The Ramones’ song “Today your love, Tomorrow the world,” referenced Ava Braun’s and Hitler’s love, The Ramones also referred to themselves as “Nazis” in the song, even though Joey Ramone was Jewish. Rachel notes in the end of the book that he is just presenting the facts as they are and making historical references to WWII and Holocaust history to identify possible references and allusions that the bands make. However, I’m not sure that anyone listening to this song took The Ramones to be Nazis, since they never really seemed serious about the subjects in any of their songs. They also sang about sniffing glue, wanting to get shock treatment, and claiming to be victims of a teenage lobotomy. In fact, Rachel later references The Ramones’ song “Bonzo goes to Bitburg” released shortly after Reagan’s shameful visit to an SS cemetery where he advocated for forgetting the past atrocities. If anything, this example shows how The Ramones used this imagery and references not lightly, but rather in a critical if not sarcastic manner to lessen the power and allure of the Nazis. It was interesting to consider other case studies and musicians like Sid Vicious (if you could even call him a musician or artist) who used Nazi imagery to shock and incite the older generation. I don’t agree with that approach, and I think Rachel makes a good case in noting that art should be provocative, but the “atrocities of the Third Reich are not to be used lightly as creative inspiration.” I think that the latter sections really helped me understand this argument much more, especially when we think about more modern examples of shock rock and how some artists demonstrate their ignorance in the use of Nazi imagery. He cites examples of Marilyn Manson and Ye to show how current attempts by musicians to shock are problematic and in many ways lazy. For Manson, the analogy between current politics and Nazis didn’t add up, especially in a country that allowed his music to thrive and be accessible, if not criticized, by many. I don’t really understand why Ye expressed his love for Hitler, but he clearly seems like someone who needs a lot of attention, but he has recently attempted to apologize for his Nazi era. In fact, it makes less sense when you read about Hitler’s thoughts about Black athletes like Jesse Owens who competed in the 1936 Olympics. I’m sure that Hitler would not have been a fan of Ye’s at all.
It’s interesting to see Rachel’s theory that the increasing education and introduction of Holocaust studies into curricula in Europe and America in the 1980s and 1990s as well as popular representations of Holocaust stories ranging from The Diary of Anne Frank to Art Spiegelman’s Maus to Elie Wiesel’s Night to films like Schindler’s List all helped to raise consciousness about the Holocaust and the evils of the Third Reich, which is a possible reason why the use of Nazi imagery and themes today has taken on a different tone, and where we are quick to either question or condemn its use. If anything, it’s important to remember the consequences of this kind of damaged nationalism and dangerous pull of the crowd since in the US we have seen an uptick in using Nazi-type propaganda in government social media messages where the Department of Homeland Security has posted “We’ll have our home again” and the Department of Labor posted “One Homeland. One People. One Heritage,” slogans that have a nearly literal German translation from Nazi slogans. As Rachel seems to argue, raising awareness is the first step, but it is also important to question and challenge, and not merely accept the repurposing of these phrases, images, and slogans.
In addition to these examples, I was really surprised to learn about some of the earlier Nazi examples Rachel cites from classic rock. In particular, there are stories about John Lennon’s fascination with Nazis, and how members of bands ranging from the Rolling Stones, the Who and Led Zeppelin would dress up in Nazi uniforms, sometimes for performances. I was aware of Bowie’s flirtations with fascism, as well as the explicit racism of Eric Clapton, who made continued racist comments in concert in the 1970s, even after scoring a hit from a Bob Marley cover song (once again appropriating Black art). This book was filled with various examples of artists who used fascism and especially Nazi imagery and ideas in their music. The book traces these examples from classic rock through punk and post-punk up until more modern examples and provides instances of other representations of Nazism in popular culture. Some of the most unbelievable examples are in the nazisploitation films like Isla, She Wolf of the SS, where Rachel provides the chilling real life Ilse Koch as the basis for this story. Other films like Salon Kitty and The Night Porter, which was especially celebrated and copied by artists ranging from Siouxsie Sioux to Madonna, were referenced, but also questioned as to the purpose of these films. Was it to shock? To excite? Or were there questions about the nature of power and violence? Rachel raises important questions as to the nature of these films and their impact on punk rock, popular music, and fashion, questioning whether they introduced a kind of Nazi-chic that remains relevant today as people rightly scrutinize the fashy fashion choices of ICE thug Gregory Bovino.
I was drawn to this book since it is a book about music, and the striking cover, featuring what looks like a Hitler youth banging a drum, really grabbed my attention as well. It’s a familiar picture, looking like something from either Joy Division album artwork or a recent Turning Point for Elementary School recruitment poster. While the book sometimes goes down a historical Hitler hole, deeply researching connections between history and the music Rachel discusses, it’s still a deeply important and timely book. Rachel’s research and connections made me question the music I consumed, and while I will still listen to the Ramones, Joy Division, The Stooges, Slayer, and Motorhead, I think it’s important to consider how the images they use are possibly pushing aside the horrors and atrocities of the Third Reich. I’m glad that in the last section of the book, Rachel references the infamous Dead Kennedy’s song about Nazi punks, and how they used that song to promote anti-racism, selling arm bands with crossed-out swastikas. For me, in a lot of ways, punk and metal was more about questioning this kind of overbearing authority and finding ways to assert your own voice, be your own person, amidst a society that will sometimes brutally push individuals towards conformity. Furthermore, the actions of education, awareness, and remembrance are even more important as US government officials like Elon Musk are given passes and grace for Nazi salutes, only to make Nazi-themed jokes on his social media account. I just kept thinking about the absurdity of this situation, where some of the most powerful people in the world were seemingly endorsing these policies, and remembered to the events in VA in 2017, where Trump celebrated, in his words, some “very fine people, on both sides,” and his continued refusal to disavow racism and bigotry from followers like the Proud Boys and David Duke. Rachel’s book is an important read, not only for music fans, but for anyone who consumes media today. It’s important to be aware of the kinds of messages that are swirling around, and how powerful groups can use images, propaganda, and catchy slogans to win over hearts and minds, attempting to sway our beliefs. Furthermore, Rachel’s research in this book is an important reminder about how powerful and successful the Nazis were in manipulation- in using images, slogans, and misinformation to sway so many people or to cover up their atrocities in the guise of nationalism, patriotism, duty, and honor. This book is important to remember those lessons from history because as Jello Biafra sang in the Dead Kennedy’s famous song “You’ll be the first to go, unless you think.” Highly recommended!

[t · Rating 2 out of 5]

Super informative and I highly encourage anyone into punk, youth movements, subculture, or modern history to read this. The structure of each chapter was great, and I was never bored reading this book. I took off two stars for the dismissal of the divisive history between Israel and Palestine and the lack of separation between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism. It is entirely possible to not be anti-Semitic while recognizing the corruption of the Israeli government and atrocities the IDF have committed against the Palestinian people. Supporting Palestinian freedom doesn't automatically mean one is anti-Semitic.

Edit: thinking more about this book, Rachel almost completely ignores artists with questionable ties to nazism like Death in June, and instead chooses to focus on popular artists instead. strange direction that doesn’t fit with the supposed premise of the book at all.

[Siobhan Markwell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Rachel asks us why we've tolerated an astounding array of rock and pop artists' use of Nazi imagery in their public identities. It's such an obvious question. Why has no-one systematically called this out before? The music press have a long history of challenging fascist visual tropes and iffy lyrics and Rachel includes quite the selection of the rebuttals, denials and apologies for third Reich imagery in the book but at no point have those responsible been cancelled. Far from it.

Having said that, most of the musicians catalogued here are not fascists or apologists for the holocaust. The stupid among them are naive about the message they send when channeling the SS or Hitler Youth on their album covers or live show iconography but there's also some exploration of committed and intentional far right outfits and the role of Rock Against Racism and the Anti-Nazi League in calling them out. Rachel's hyper-comprehensive catalogue of bands' use of fascist apparel and references spans the sixties to the present day. Punk's protest that it was only doing it to annoy their parents' I-fought-in-the-war generation and break taboos (as evidenced by their test tube baby pendants and transgressive shop names) is well worn and, for someone who witnessed it, feels credible enough. Less convincing is the argument that "we didn't know about the holocaust, honest guv" or "Anyone who knows me knows I'm not anti-Semitic; my flatmate is Jewish/Black" and I doubt the assertion that the SS ambition to annhialate the Jews was little-known until World at War came out on the telly and Nazi genocide was added to school curricula in the early nineties.

What Rachel might have spent more time on in the closing stages of the book was the way atrocities like the Holocaust just birth the next barrage of war-crimes. There's no need to highlight where this is currently playing out. He touches on Bob Vylan's performance at Glastonbury. In fairness, I guess the fascists are always looking for a justification to hate on Jewish people and the desire to provide a get-out clause for the anti-Semites makes the omission understandable. Even so, the avoidance of the issue feels like a gaping black hole in the narrative and one that draws, not deflects, attention from Zionist excesses. A second edition might profitably drop part of the, sometimes slightly repetitive, information about the dress sense of 20th century acts and look at the causes and ethics that the establishment does consider anathema when it pops up in a song or on an album cover and contrast this with its historically lax approach to challenging Nazi iconography. We can't disconnect this important calling out of poor taste in popular culture from and exploration of what the authorities have been happily arraigning in court in 2025-26.

[J Earl · Rating 4 out of 5]

This Ain't Rock 'n' Roll by Daniel Rachel is, like most of his books, hits on many cylinders but seriously misfires on others. But, also like the others, an uneven ride worth taking.

The strength of this book lies in the roundup of the many examples of rock/pop stars appropriating Nazi symbols and even sometimes rhetoric for both their public persona and their private enjoyment. Many of the instances here will be familiar to music history fans and scholars, but to have them collected in one volume highlights the range of use and abuse. From some that were mostly for shock purposes to some far more difficult to view that way and some that leave almost no doubt that they believed and approved.

I think that each case has to be understood separately. Not in a vacuum, certainly context has to be considered, but it is a mistake to simply lump these people into one or two cookie-cutter categories. And that is where Rachel, as usual, goes astray. Intellectual analyses and deep understanding is not his strength. It simply isn't why you pick up one of his books. But he makes broad, demonstrably false statements that generalize far more than he would get away with in a scholarly study. Even though I tend to agree with much of what he both implies and says, I at least understand that I don't "know" these things. he, however, seems to be able to read everyone's minds, even those who are dead, and tell us the truth.

Definitely worth reading and facing the possibility that some of your favorite musicians may not be all that you thought they were. Whether you chalk some of it up to misguided attempts to shock and be different or to blatant disregard for what the hate-inspired symbolism of the Third Reich still means to many people, knowing what these stars have done has to color your perception of them. Hiding from it is certainly a possibility but I think we are better off knowing what they did and coming to terms with it. Might you no longer love an artist you adored? Yes. But you will also learn where you might draw your own line and what kind of person you are. It isn't a positive statement about someone if they support genocide, whether it was almost a century ago or taking place right now. If you can't be consistent, then it isn't genocide you oppose, it is simply which group that suffers that matters to you.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.

[Shane · Rating 2 out of 5]

This Ain’t Rock n Roll details the many rock stars who have dabbled with Nazi imagery or praised Hitler and the Third Reich. Unfolding largely chronologically, we meet a depressing list of figures from Keith Richards in SS uniform and a swastika-wearing, racism-spouting Siouxsie Sioux, through to Kanye West declaring himself a Nazi. Unfortunately, though Rachel tries to give a sense of a developing narrative, it becomes repetitive: a rock star spouts pro-Nazi garbage, they (mostly) refuse to apologise or say they sought to shock, and Rachel reminds us how unacceptable that is. In some cases, such as an artist praising Hitler as ‘the first rock star’, it’s easy to agree - such statements should have been scrutinised and criticised at the time.

In other cases though, Rachel seems to argue that referencing the Nazis is artistically invalid unless the audience understands the context is criticism and not celebration. Yet later he praises the “righteous” Holocaust songs of the Manic Street Preachers. How does he know their listeners understood the context? Other arguments are weaker still: the BBC renaming Massive Attack as “Massive” on-air during the Gulf War is used to claim they should have similarly censored the name Joy Division, even though the situations are vastly different. At points, Rachel widens his lens to Nazi-fetishising cinema or books, demonstrating this is more than just a music problem. Rachel could have mitigated his weak analytical skills by interviewing qualified experts, but he never talks to a historian, sociologist, semiotician or any other useful expert.

[Amanda W · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sometimes this book felt like reading someone’s thesis that had not yet been looked over by their advisor. I was left with many questions about things such as: why Rachel decided to contact all the musicians but neglected to attempt to contact any of the writers or journalists who chose to ignore the usage of Nazi imagery and lyrics in write-ups, why he did not acknowledge complete quotes or the full story behind some choices, and why he chose to repeatedly lump various musicians together without actually discussing how or why they were related.

In all, this is an exhaustive study of the ways that beloved musicians (most likely many of your favorites) have worn Nazi-related clothing, adopted the swastika or other Nazi imagery, utilized that imagery in their album covers, spoken out about their admiration of Hitler, the Nazi party, and fascism itself, and used Nazi phrases and images in their songs. It was, I am sure, a tough task to research and write. It is difficult to read in many parts, mainly because it is uncomfortable to read about people you admired doing and saying horrible things. And that is probably why Rachel decided to write this book.

While This Ain't Rock 'n' Roll is a bit all over the place, a bit confusing, and a bit prone to generalizations, it remains a challenging look at an unpleasant subject that also manages to be quite readable.

[Thorkell Ottarsson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I grew up during the punk era and never understood the use of the swastika and nazi artifacts. The people using them would be the first to be killed if they were alive during the reign of Hitler. This book addresses the fascination with the Third Reich in rock and pop music. It is broad in scope and well researched. I think most people will find some of their favorite musicians guilty of nazi flirtation in this book. It is shocking how widespread it is within music history. I found this book to be very informative and, in fact, a true eye-opener.

[Tim · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another amazing book, which is probably a triliogy of political music books from 'Walls Come Tumbling Down' (my personal favourite), 'Two Tone' and this one. A really important book which unfortunately those on the far-right need to read but probably will not.

[Nick Bowles · Rating 2 out of 5]

Oh dear

Thought this sounded an interesting premise for a book , would have been far better if any of the myriad examples cited were accompanied by pictures. Missed a bit of an opportunity there .

[David · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found the book enlightening and well researched. The examples and points that the author wrote about are very applicable to the current situation United States today. “...both fans and artists bear a responsibility to history.”

[Glen · Rating 4 out of 5]

A well written, informative book concerning Rock N Roll and Nazi Germany symbolism. The book was factual, concerning Music, Music artists and even about Nazi Germany and the camps. Some of the artists discussed were very surprising.

[David Wagner · Rating 3 out of 5]

(wider review in preparation, especially the more contemporary stuff is very selective and inherently problematic)