It’s no stretch. Jazz is an expression of democracy. So much so it was outlawed in Nazi Germany, and later banned in the Soviet Union where it was not uncommon to see signs like, “If you let people play jazz they will revolt,” or “if you play saxophone, you’re a degenerate.” What makes jazz so threatening to autocrats and dictators is the element most central to genre: freedom, which in jazz translates as improvisation, musical individualism, where players create melodies and modify harmonies as they play and others in the band support their flights of fancy.
In the first episode of our podcast series Music Life and Times, my podcast partner, jazz pianist Kevin Bales, who has performed in Moscow and Beijing, explained that jazz at its origination was “a radical concept, the idea that a group of musicians can create fine art out of cooperation without there being one composer dictating what the notes should be.”
In fact, jazz emerged as a protest, a plea for freedom. To be clear, music is entertainment, and most musicians are not out to make a point other than to use their talents to entertain, that is, to add to people’s enjoyment of life. Still, as an expression of freedom, music, in particular jazz, plays a social role, and in so doing gives the world one more reason to protect democracy from those who find it uncomfortable.
Learning to play music requires the player to embrace three key attributes: cooperation, discipline, and self-reliance. In his Lincoln Center programs for children, jazz trumpeter and composer Wynton Marsalis teaches that jazz reinforces the concept that every person has a unique identity. Such ideas and fundamental democratic beliefs do not sit well with autocrats.