Alternate Views of Hip Hop

"Yes, our rhymes can contain violence and hatred. Yes, our songs can detail the drug business and our choruses can bounce with lustful intent. However, those things did not spring from inferior imaginations or deficient morals; these things came from our lives. They came from America. The folks from the suburbs and the private schools so concerned with putting warning labels on my records missed the point. They never stopped to worry about the realities in this country that spread poverty and racism and gun violence and hatred of women and drug use and unemployment. People can act like rappers spread these things, but that is not true. Our lives are not rotten or worthless just because that’s what people say about the real estate that we were raised on. In fact, our lives may be even more worthy of study because we succeeded despite the promises of failure seeping out from behind the peeling paint on the walls of every apartment in every project."

(Jay-Z's comments in the Intro of Michael Eric Dyson's new book, "Know What I Mean, - Reflections on Hip Hop")

...And Now For Another Point of View....

"Au contraire, mon frere!" (On the contrary, my brother!) He's rationalizing throughout this entire diatribe: I don't buy it...this is deflecting the negativity, violence, misogyny, etc. is the "fault" of America as an entity. Just because you came from "squat" doesn't mean you have to glorify and deify "squat" . No. Not having it. Not today, not tomorrow. Our ancestors had zip and educated themselves and rose up to elevate themselves and our lot. Hip hop is a music form....period...and on so many levels in my opinion, denigrates the community it comes from (how did Jay-Z put it, "young working-class men and women of color"...rrrriiggghhhttt).

And the white, male record executives who promote and push this crap out big time...and the minstrels (rappers, so-called singers) who perform a lot of that crap....play to the white suburban kids who love this sheet...even though most have never met nor conversed with a person of color in their life. Then when they take over the keys to the executive washroom from daddy, uncle, whoever...and they see a face of color...they pre-suppose that person is from the thug life (yah, think?).

I'd argue because Jay-Z and his ilk rap, sing and glorify about "jacking us and our families", "dissing our women", "drug-dealing and drug-abusing", "skipping school," etc. that they contribute to the morass of our communities. Instead of educating themselves and being productive members of society and their communities (I'd like to see the educational bios on most of these hip hop artists...I'll even lower the bar and give GED candidates a pass!) they choose to glorify the negative, which in fact perpetuates it to the young and impressionable, and thus they serve as negative role-models IMHO. They can make their millions out of their modern day minstrelsy and negativity but I ain't buying it and certainly not elevating it!

This is America and the hip hop crowd is entitled and has the right to perform what they want to perform (I'm a big First Amendment kind of guy)...but I'm not buying the product nor the excuses, rationalizations and so-called justifications for the bile and violence that is spewed. Dyson has found his ship to sail on...and cha-ching...he's taking his doubloons all the way to the bank!

The hip hop crowd is free to do what it wants to do as long as its legal..but it should be no surprise that violence (NBA weekend in Vegas?? concerts??), misogyny (how many got kids by multiple women?) and the "low life" is glorified and REAL working-class folks who stay on the right side of the law, who go to school, who take care of their families, who practice responsible family planning, etc. are relegated to the back row (if not, kicked to the curb out the door!). Nah, we gonna shout about bling, babes, booty and Bentleys....puh-leez!

Sure, the anthropologists and sociologists can study and pimp the lifestyle in their books (Dyson??) all they want...I'm not impressed...I'm not buying what they're selling. No. Not today, not tomorrow. Rising up by your bootstraps, as it were, on negativity and irresponsibility gets no free pass from me...in fact, I say "Don't pass Go!" to collect another $200! I'd rather see something worthy of study by those from the same peeling painted walls of the apartments who are positive, responsible and have made a life for themselves that seeks to elevate and role-model a head held high...and not with a doo-rag on in the daytime either! "

(Reflections and rants of Nezet, Prophet of the Surreal)

Sportsmen Running Amok

There will be much more said about these latest sports stories since they are just breaking as I write this. It's hard to say which one is worst - quarterback Michael Vick's federal indictment on dog fighting and cruelty charges, or basketball referee Tim Donaghy's resignation amidst accusations of gambling, in particular on the games he refereed, and his apparent controlling of game scores to beat the point spreads.

Predictably already, the sports pundits are working overtime to put out their spins on the stories. In the Vick case, the massive invectives and vitriol already being levied against him, makes it hard to say whether it comes from the outrage of true animal lovers, or the hidden racism of the sports public, who only recently and reluctantly accepted Blacks in the position of NFL quarterback, but who still hate the thought of any Black athlete having a $100 million+ contract. Most want him to be summarily fired, even as they disingenuously mouth that 'he is innocent until proven guilty.' Even ex-klansman, Senator Robert Byrd of Virginia, just called for his 'execution' - presumably by lynching as the klan used to do. And I just heard one prominent sportscaster call him a 'knuckleheaded, sadistic son-of-a-bitch' on his radio show. It's hard to imagine him referring to White quarterback Peyton Manning that way, before he even is tried and convicted in a court of law.

The Donaghy case in my view, is much more serious in that it challenges the integrity of ALL the NBA games that he and other dirty referees were involved in. This could go back a number of years and involve hundreds, maybe thousands of calls, that could have been made to alter games during the season and post-season. Stern and his NBA, thought their problem was just unruly Blacks who had to be controlled. Now he is drowning in the waters of his worst nightmare - that some, many, or all NBA games in recent years, may have been in some way compromised and fixed by the gamblers and their referee proxies on the basketball court. Stern's draconian savaging of Ron Artest for his part in the Detroit-Pacer fight, may yet prove to be a false-flag decision, because the refs did not move quickly enough to stop the fight, as the Detroit Pistons contended. Looking back now, why did Donaghy and his fellow refs not stop the fight sooner, was it to possibly affect the final score by selectively evicting those players they needed to get rid of first? Or was it ?????????? or ?????????? or ??????????. Take your pick - every aspect of, and decision about that game, is now in question.

Mandatory ADB

The Civil Rights Act of 1991 was introduced to protect workers from job discrimination in the workplace. Like all socially responsible programs, it has recently come under attack, led by the efforts of a think-tank at Washington University in St. Louis, Mo. They have come up with a way for employers to avoid responsibility for workplace discrimination, by requiring prospective employees to purchase a bond (Anti-Discrimination Bond) through monthly payroll deductions as a condition of employment, to indemnify the employer should the employee later sue. This bond would be required of employees who are in groups protected by the EEOC, as Blacks are.

To show that this bond idea is targeted primarily at Blacks and is inherently racist, there is no talk of requiring such bonds of women who are hired and who could later sue for sexual harassment; neither is this bond being required of elderly hires who could later sue for age discrimination; neither is this being required of workers with disabilities who could later sue for lack of proper accommodations for their disabilities.

I think this bond would be held unconstitutional if challenged in court, but until then, in will be another stumbling block put in the paths of minorities seeking employment.

Instead of companies cleaning up their acts and purging their organizations of racist managers to ensure there is no racism and discrimination being practiced against ANYONE, they prefer instead, to try to discourage possible lawsuits that they know will probably be warranted at some point in the careers of their minority employees.

http://news-info.wustl.edu/tips/page/normal/9574.html