All That Remains vocalist Phil Labonte speaks on varying political views in the band & more

In a recent Revolver cover story, Phil Labonte, vocalist of All That Remains, addressed the distinction between his personal political views and his band's musical output. Despite being outspoken on political issues—most notably through his involvement in the Timcast podcast and his libertarian beliefs—Labonte clarified that All That Remains does not engage in political messaging within their music.

While Labonte's right-wing advocacy, including his strong support for gun rights, is well-known on his personal platforms, he keeps these views separate from the band's work, making a conscious effort to not bring politics into their music or public image. This separation allows the band to maintain a more neutral space, focused on their music rather than personal ideologies.

Labonte shared the following:

I've always tried to do that, and the reason is because All That Remains has always had people with different political opinions. Myself and Jeanne Sagan, our [former] bass player, we had some pretty distinct political opinions. Jason Richardson and I have very distinct political differences of opinion. And I have never, in my entire life, I've never thought politics is a reason to stop being friends with someone. So, for me, it was just like, 'Look, I can't get onstage and preach.' I think the most political thing I've ever done at an All That Remains show is I wore a Ron Paul shirt in 2012 and that's about it.

Oh, and I think back when I would indulge in marijuana, I think Colorado had just legalized marijuana and I made a remark. I was like, 'Good to see Colorado has legalized marijuana.' Of course, obviously nowadays that's not at all in any way controversial.

There are guys in the band that are right on the same page with me, there are guys in the band that aren't at all on the same page with me. That's normal in my opinion. If you don't have friends that you disagree with, I feel like that's abnormal.

When asked about living in a time where it's difficult to have a dissenting opinion, Labonte expressed his belief:

I think we did. I think that's changing. Mark Zuckerberg just yesterday came out and doubled down on a speech that he made about five years ago about the free exchange of ideas.

I think at the end of the day, everybody in America has more common than they have difference. And I think that the impulse to push people to look at their neighbors as their enemy, I think that that has run its course and I think most Americans are tired of it.

I think that that's going to be something that you're going to see more and more of people saying, 'Look, maybe Mark Zuckerberg is right. Maybe we should actually listen to the people that we disagree with.'

And I think that if people have a certain preconceived notion about my perspective, it's because they're listening to what other people say about me. They're not listening to anything that I've said. They're not listening to my perspective.

I'm very, very much a 'live and let live' kind of dude. I don't have any political opinions that are in any way considerably extreme. They're very milquetoast. They're very Nineties Democrat, to be honest with you. I've been called a Nazi more times than I can count — and yet at the same time I have been attacked by Nazis as a Jewish shill or a shill for Israel more times than I can count, too. If you're getting it from both sides, you can't be that extreme to any of the sides.

 Reflecting on "Cancel Culture":

It's really on us as the average people to decide if there's any power to that at all. The thing that happens when people get canceled is someone will say something and will be like, "Oh, this person did this thing that I don't like." And then there's a pile-on on the internet.

And I don't think that that's a good thing for society, especially when it's someone that was intentionally not doing what is ostensibly presented. So, if someone is saying something and they're not intending to be insulting or divisive or bigoted or whatever, they're talking about something and it's not just being callously thrown around, if that's not the case, then there's no reason for people to see negative repercussions in their life. If someone's calling someone else a name or something like that, then maybe it makes sense for a company to say, 'We don't want to associate with you anymore.'

But I do think that the frivolous cancel culture is probably done. And as long as there are people that are going to be trying to use outrage as a way to influence other people's behavior, I think that there's always going to be constant outrage. And I think people are kind of done with being constantly outraged. So, at least for a little while. We'll see.