Insane in a country that putatively pretends to be about free speech, you get arrested for caring about Palestine or singing a song with bad words (feel free to be a Nazi though, that's fine).
Insane in a country that putatively pretends to be about free speech, you get arrested for caring about Palestine or singing a song with bad words (feel free to be a Nazi though, that's fine).
But we're also a country that absolutely does not care about the rights of anyone* convicted of a crime (or in custody pre-trial.) Probation and parole officers often have great leeway in...
But we're also a country that absolutely does not care about the rights of anyone* convicted of a crime (or in custody pre-trial.) Probation and parole officers often have great leeway in restricting the behaviors of those they oversee. I've seen parole agents submit a revocation of parole for disrespect which is clearly free speech.
This isn't ok, but it's not surprising at all.
*Some exclusions apply depending on financial and celebrity status and whether we think they're physically attractive mostly.
It's toward the end of the article, but it appears BG served 14 years for "illegal gun possession" in conjunction with a traffic stop. That seems pretty uneven itself, given the state of gun...
It's toward the end of the article, but it appears BG served 14 years for "illegal gun possession" in conjunction with a traffic stop. That seems pretty uneven itself, given the state of gun ownership policy and rhetoric in this country.
While I'd love 14 years in prison to be the norm for possessing a firearm (outside of hunting rifles with annual licensure and storage inspections, like Japan's model), clearly the state of things is about as far from that as you can get, with open carry and radical gun maximalists being endemic...
So the impression I get from this is the crime in question smells like some major prejudice in the first place. We can't stop conservatives who establish a pattern of warning signs from owning guns, legally or illegally, and then they go and commit mass murder and people still shrug it off...but this is okay. And something tells me the sets of people who are all for gun maximalism and the people who see no problem with this conviction or unconstitutional parole have a strong intersection.
Gun Rights Absolutists are fine with Everyone™ owning guns right up until non whites start organizing and purchasing those sweet sweet firearms. We saw this with Black Panthers in the 1960's where...
Gun Rights Absolutists are fine with Everyone™ owning guns right up until non whites start organizing and purchasing those sweet sweet firearms. We saw this with Black Panthers in the 1960's where The Great NeoLib Ronald Reagan (Rest in Piss) signed a California law into place as governor that made it illegal to carry a loaded firearm without a permit. Doesn't sound very gun right absolutist to me...
Edit to add that this bill was supported by the NRA, weird. It's almost like gun control is specifically targeting people of color in America...
Yeah. This feels very prejudiced. Also, correlation is not causation, hip hop songs about gang violence does not mean they cause gang violence, so trying to control an artists lyrics is insane to me.
Yeah. This feels very prejudiced. Also, correlation is not causation, hip hop songs about gang violence does not mean they cause gang violence, so trying to control an artists lyrics is insane to me.
To add to that, someone writing lyrics that describe gang life, gang violence, or living in areas affected by high crime is the same as someone depicting these things in movies or television...
To add to that, someone writing lyrics that describe gang life, gang violence, or living in areas affected by high crime is the same as someone depicting these things in movies or television shows. Should all visual media producers now get approval from the US government before making their art?
Also it seems laughable in the intentions. Do they think silencing this person will make these things go away? Instead of address the systemic issues that cause poverty that plagues areas with gang violence and high crime it is just easier to ban talking about it.
I don't mean this as bad as it's going to come across, but did you read the article by chance? The order was for rather specific reasons, and trying to cover up the systemic issues had nothing to...
Also it seems laughable in the intentions. Do they think silencing this person will make these things go away?
I don't mean this as bad as it's going to come across, but did you read the article by chance? The order was for rather specific reasons, and trying to cover up the systemic issues had nothing to do with them. Indeed, the judge specifically upheld BG's right to "promot[e] and glorify future gun violence/murder.”
The judge did, yes, but if he still needs "approval" or he is punished for using his right to free speech then isn't that the same thing as limiting his speech? Maybe I'm an idiot when it comes to...
The judge did, yes, but if he still needs "approval" or he is punished for using his right to free speech then isn't that the same thing as limiting his speech? Maybe I'm an idiot when it comes to legal things but it seems the ruling is at odds with itself?
Also, the systemic issue was not mentioned, true, but this has been 30+ years of the Clutch Your Pearls types trying to either ban, limit, or censor Rap/Hip Hop because of people using their art and music to discuss systemic issues with the Black community.
For sure, but free speech is not absolute, even in the US (where it is much closer than in almost any other country). Just look at the defamation cases against the former US president trump....
The judge did, yes, but if he still needs "approval" or he is punished for using his right to free speech then isn't that the same thing as limiting his speech?
For sure, but free speech is not absolute, even in the US (where it is much closer than in almost any other country). Just look at the defamation cases against the former US president trump.
Anyway, though, I brought that up not because I was trying to argue that his speech wasn't being limited (it is, you're right), but because I am trying to argue that the government is not trying to silence him or prevent him from calling attention to systemic issues. He accepted a prison release deal that specifically involved federal supervision and rehabilitation, and so it's not that far-fetched for the government to say "you can rap about murder but please stop publically threatening people who cooperate with the police."
For what it's worth, I am philosophically 100% with you, I love rap, and I think it's super important for giving the American ghetto a voice... but I can't agree that this subgenre of gangsta rap discusses systemic issues in the black community. At least not in any sort of constructive way. I'm not saying anyone who does one can't do the other - just look at Tupac, who was constantly rapping about both. But again, the government isn't saying "stop rapping about how kids have no choice but to become pushers because other opportunities are closed to them," and they're not even saying "stop rapping about killing people." They're saying "please stop threatening people and you know you're not supposed to be associating with felons."
In any event, his lawyers are now saying that he wasn't issued any such mandate at all so who knows.
I want to be clear I'm not in support of this. I am not educated on this particular case and I generally don't find prison to be helpful at all. (I understand wanting stricter penalties for unsafe...
I want to be clear I'm not in support of this. I am not educated on this particular case and I generally don't find prison to be helpful at all. (I understand wanting stricter penalties for unsafe gun ownership, I don't love guns, but I want shorter or non-existent prison terms for most crimes.)
That there was some bias in this case I can basically assume as fact, but violating basic rights is at the core of criminal justice in the US - the state gets to do it because of the individuals actions. But parolee/probationer rights are also violated daily and as a country/society we do not care because "they" "deserve" it. If he wins this fight, essentially nothing will change because he'll just be one of those exceptions.
I think lately the US has just gone completely mask off and stated that they don't care about anyone's rights if they are not rich white christian nationalists. Modern Feudalism here we come!
I think lately the US has just gone completely mask off and stated that they don't care about anyone's rights if they are not rich white christian nationalists. Modern Feudalism here we come!
It seems reasonable, given that murder accounts for 51% of deaths of rap musicians, versus 6.0% for all musicians. Free speech is not absolute. Incitement of violence is such a boundary. The judge...
Prosecutors also maintained that Dorsey did not obtain the necessary clearance to produce such work, which they argued also undermined his goals of rehabilitation, citing lyrics that exalted a pair of men who are serving sentences of life imprisonment after being linked to multiple murders in a drug-dealing and gang-violence racketeering case.
... prosecutors asked Judge Morgan to require him to refrain “from promoting and glorifying future gun violence/murder” as well as threats against people who cooperate with the police in songs and at concerts, among other requests.
Free speech is not absolute. Incitement of violence is such a boundary.
The judge has been very lenient and fair with him:
A US federal judge has refused prosecutors’ request to prohibit [BG] “from promoting and glorifying future gun violence/murder” in songs and at concerts while on supervised release from prison, saying such a restriction could violate his constitutional right to free speech.
But the artist known as BG must provide the government with copies of any songs he writes moving forward, ahead of their production or promotion – and, if they are deemed to be inconsistent with his goals of rehabilitation, prosecutors could move to toughen the terms dictating his supervised release.
They have designed his rehabilitation such that he is limited from participating and perpetuating cycles of retributory violence in the rap music community. This should be lauded.
edit: the cause of death by music genre is a fun piece.
Folk and jazz musicians—think Bob Dylan and his generation; young musicians gravitate toward other genres—are quite old now, so they're dying from cancer.
Rock, punk, and metal musicians die from 'accidents', i.e. drug overdoses. That tracks with the rock and roll and drugs lifestyle.
Rap musicians rarely die from heart issues or cancer because they probably don't get to reach an old enough age to experience those issues.
Murder accounting for 51% of rap musicians vs others is not a result of rap music. The lyrics that many rap musicians use in their songs are a result of their lived lives. They're rapping about...
Murder accounting for 51% of rap musicians vs others is not a result of rap music. The lyrics that many rap musicians use in their songs are a result of their lived lives. They're rapping about this stuff because murder rates are so high. Murder rates aren't so high because of rap music.
I'm not sure we should laud the justice system's treatment of a black man ever. The justice system has a long history of mistreatment to black Americans, and I'm not comfortable with them deciding what he should and shouldn't rap about.
According to the CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/lcod/men/2018/nonhispanic-black/index.htm Cause of death for all non-Hispanic black men, homicide accounts for 4.5%. In the 20–44 age...
Cause of death for all non-Hispanic black men, homicide accounts for 4.5%. In the 20–44 age bracket, where rap musicians tend to fall in, it's 26.1% — 51% is 2x that. There's clearly something going on.
I'm not sure we should laud the justice system's treatment of a black man ever. The justice system has a long history of mistreatment to black Americans, and I'm not comfortable with them deciding what he should and shouldn't rap about.
Institutions are only the people who run them.
Oakland and Boston police have run effective violence reduction programs (both named Operation Ceasefire, I believe) where police identify individuals and gangs for violence interventions. The programs have shown to significantly reduce homicides. A key part of the programs is to promote positive communication, conflict resolution, and community dialogue. These are communities where violence and language of violence are used to settle conflicts; rap music is such a vehicle.
Maybe. I'm not in favor of limiting this guy's free speech but you should spend some time in r/chiraqology if you want to see what's really happening with modern rap music as it relates to...
Maybe. I'm not in favor of limiting this guy's free speech but you should spend some time in r/chiraqology if you want to see what's really happening with modern rap music as it relates to homicide.
Unfortunately, the new generation of rappers are completely obsessed with social media. They're super proud to be dealing fentanyl and committing murders on camera - way different than the socially conscious rap that warned about the dangers of these things in previous generations.
There is a culture of "get backs" where these young artists film high definition video of them getting back at people for real or perceived slights by murdering them. The music is a huge, huge part of it. First, you make a song with your gang warning that "Person A" is about to die. Then they die and the video is posted online. Then a song is released bragging about the murder, while the artist maintains that they're just making music and they didn't do it (whether that's true or not, it could be argued that they put out the hit by making the previous song).
The rapper in my example will also be the victim of a "get back" within weeks or months. The cycle continues.
I believe you are completely forgetting the Gangster Rap era from the late 1980s to 1990s completely with your statement about "new generation of rappers". Just because the art discusses real...
I believe you are completely forgetting the Gangster Rap era from the late 1980s to 1990s completely with your statement about "new generation of rappers". Just because the art discusses real things happening in the community or even the rapper themselves doesn't mean that this isn't social discourse.
White Flight and White Fortressing was or had happened in most of the communities heavily affected by gang violence and higher crime rates. This is all after the fact that equal rights literally happened barely a decade and a half before Gangster Rap started becoming big time in the music industry.
I remember it, but it was missing the social media component. I am one of those people who almost always believes in freedom of speech with very few exceptions. But when you bring the internet...
I remember it, but it was missing the social media component.
I am one of those people who almost always believes in freedom of speech with very few exceptions. But when you bring the internet into it and start really digging into what's happening with gangs, terrorism, politics, etc., I start to wonder if a lot of our old ideals about free speech still hold up.
Kind of like how semi-automatic weapons and mass shootings have reshaped the discussion around the second amendment. The internet has drastically changed how, and how quickly, ideas can be disseminated.
I probably overstated the causation where I meant none, but 51% is a little eyebrow-raising, no? That's much, much, much higher than the baseline homicide-as-cause-of-death rate for young Black...
I probably overstated the causation where I meant none, but 51% is a little eyebrow-raising, no? That's much, much, much higher than the baseline homicide-as-cause-of-death rate for young Black Americans.
Incitement of violence has been incredibly limited by the Supreme Court. I think that if this case were brought to the current court, it would not count as inciting violence. It's honestly...
Free speech is not absolute. Incitement of violence is such a boundary.
Incitement of violence has been incredibly limited by the Supreme Court. I think that if this case were brought to the current court, it would not count as inciting violence. It's honestly frustrating how little counts as incitement these days.
But once again, it's broadly legal to restrict most of his rights as someone on parole so it probably doesn't matter.
Insane in a country that putatively pretends to be about free speech, you get arrested for caring about Palestine or singing a song with bad words (feel free to be a Nazi though, that's fine).
But we're also a country that absolutely does not care about the rights of anyone* convicted of a crime (or in custody pre-trial.) Probation and parole officers often have great leeway in restricting the behaviors of those they oversee. I've seen parole agents submit a revocation of parole for disrespect which is clearly free speech.
This isn't ok, but it's not surprising at all.
*Some exclusions apply depending on financial and celebrity status and whether we think they're physically attractive mostly.
It's toward the end of the article, but it appears BG served 14 years for "illegal gun possession" in conjunction with a traffic stop. That seems pretty uneven itself, given the state of gun ownership policy and rhetoric in this country.
While I'd love 14 years in prison to be the norm for possessing a firearm (outside of hunting rifles with annual licensure and storage inspections, like Japan's model), clearly the state of things is about as far from that as you can get, with open carry and radical gun maximalists being endemic...
So the impression I get from this is the crime in question smells like some major prejudice in the first place. We can't stop conservatives who establish a pattern of warning signs from owning guns, legally or illegally, and then they go and commit mass murder and people still shrug it off...but this is okay. And something tells me the sets of people who are all for gun maximalism and the people who see no problem with this conviction or unconstitutional parole have a strong intersection.
Gun Rights Absolutists are fine with Everyone™ owning guns right up until non whites start organizing and purchasing those sweet sweet firearms. We saw this with Black Panthers in the 1960's where The Great NeoLib Ronald Reagan (Rest in Piss) signed a California law into place as governor that made it illegal to carry a loaded firearm without a permit. Doesn't sound very gun right absolutist to me...
Edit to add that this bill was supported by the NRA, weird. It's almost like gun control is specifically targeting people of color in America...
Yeah. This feels very prejudiced. Also, correlation is not causation, hip hop songs about gang violence does not mean they cause gang violence, so trying to control an artists lyrics is insane to me.
To add to that, someone writing lyrics that describe gang life, gang violence, or living in areas affected by high crime is the same as someone depicting these things in movies or television shows. Should all visual media producers now get approval from the US government before making their art?
Also it seems laughable in the intentions. Do they think silencing this person will make these things go away? Instead of address the systemic issues that cause poverty that plagues areas with gang violence and high crime it is just easier to ban talking about it.
I don't mean this as bad as it's going to come across, but did you read the article by chance? The order was for rather specific reasons, and trying to cover up the systemic issues had nothing to do with them. Indeed, the judge specifically upheld BG's right to "promot[e] and glorify future gun violence/murder.”
The judge did, yes, but if he still needs "approval" or he is punished for using his right to free speech then isn't that the same thing as limiting his speech? Maybe I'm an idiot when it comes to legal things but it seems the ruling is at odds with itself?
Also, the systemic issue was not mentioned, true, but this has been 30+ years of the Clutch Your Pearls types trying to either ban, limit, or censor Rap/Hip Hop because of people using their art and music to discuss systemic issues with the Black community.
Edited to add more to comment
For sure, but free speech is not absolute, even in the US (where it is much closer than in almost any other country). Just look at the defamation cases against the former US president trump.
Anyway, though, I brought that up not because I was trying to argue that his speech wasn't being limited (it is, you're right), but because I am trying to argue that the government is not trying to silence him or prevent him from calling attention to systemic issues. He accepted a prison release deal that specifically involved federal supervision and rehabilitation, and so it's not that far-fetched for the government to say "you can rap about murder but please stop publically threatening people who cooperate with the police."
For what it's worth, I am philosophically 100% with you, I love rap, and I think it's super important for giving the American ghetto a voice... but I can't agree that this subgenre of gangsta rap discusses systemic issues in the black community. At least not in any sort of constructive way. I'm not saying anyone who does one can't do the other - just look at Tupac, who was constantly rapping about both. But again, the government isn't saying "stop rapping about how kids have no choice but to become pushers because other opportunities are closed to them," and they're not even saying "stop rapping about killing people." They're saying "please stop threatening people and you know you're not supposed to be associating with felons."
In any event, his lawyers are now saying that he wasn't issued any such mandate at all so who knows.
I want to be clear I'm not in support of this. I am not educated on this particular case and I generally don't find prison to be helpful at all. (I understand wanting stricter penalties for unsafe gun ownership, I don't love guns, but I want shorter or non-existent prison terms for most crimes.)
That there was some bias in this case I can basically assume as fact, but violating basic rights is at the core of criminal justice in the US - the state gets to do it because of the individuals actions. But parolee/probationer rights are also violated daily and as a country/society we do not care because "they" "deserve" it. If he wins this fight, essentially nothing will change because he'll just be one of those exceptions.
I think lately the US has just gone completely mask off and stated that they don't care about anyone's rights if they are not rich white christian nationalists. Modern Feudalism here we come!
It seems reasonable, given that murder accounts for 51% of deaths of rap musicians, versus 6.0% for all musicians.
Free speech is not absolute. Incitement of violence is such a boundary.
The judge has been very lenient and fair with him:
They have designed his rehabilitation such that he is limited from participating and perpetuating cycles of retributory violence in the rap music community. This should be lauded.
edit: the cause of death by music genre is a fun piece.
Murder accounting for 51% of rap musicians vs others is not a result of rap music. The lyrics that many rap musicians use in their songs are a result of their lived lives. They're rapping about this stuff because murder rates are so high. Murder rates aren't so high because of rap music.
I'm not sure we should laud the justice system's treatment of a black man ever. The justice system has a long history of mistreatment to black Americans, and I'm not comfortable with them deciding what he should and shouldn't rap about.
According to the CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/lcod/men/2018/nonhispanic-black/index.htm
Cause of death for all non-Hispanic black men, homicide accounts for 4.5%. In the 20–44 age bracket, where rap musicians tend to fall in, it's 26.1% — 51% is 2x that. There's clearly something going on.
It can't come down to just poverty itself. American Indians experience higher rates of poverty than Black Americans, but homicide makes up 7.1% of cause of death for the 20–44 age bracket.
Institutions are only the people who run them.
Oakland and Boston police have run effective violence reduction programs (both named Operation Ceasefire, I believe) where police identify individuals and gangs for violence interventions. The programs have shown to significantly reduce homicides. A key part of the programs is to promote positive communication, conflict resolution, and community dialogue. These are communities where violence and language of violence are used to settle conflicts; rap music is such a vehicle.
this is one of the biggest "correlation is not causation" errors I've ever seen.
Maybe. I'm not in favor of limiting this guy's free speech but you should spend some time in r/chiraqology if you want to see what's really happening with modern rap music as it relates to homicide.
Unfortunately, the new generation of rappers are completely obsessed with social media. They're super proud to be dealing fentanyl and committing murders on camera - way different than the socially conscious rap that warned about the dangers of these things in previous generations.
There is a culture of "get backs" where these young artists film high definition video of them getting back at people for real or perceived slights by murdering them. The music is a huge, huge part of it. First, you make a song with your gang warning that "Person A" is about to die. Then they die and the video is posted online. Then a song is released bragging about the murder, while the artist maintains that they're just making music and they didn't do it (whether that's true or not, it could be argued that they put out the hit by making the previous song).
The rapper in my example will also be the victim of a "get back" within weeks or months. The cycle continues.
I believe you are completely forgetting the Gangster Rap era from the late 1980s to 1990s completely with your statement about "new generation of rappers". Just because the art discusses real things happening in the community or even the rapper themselves doesn't mean that this isn't social discourse.
White Flight and White Fortressing was or had happened in most of the communities heavily affected by gang violence and higher crime rates. This is all after the fact that equal rights literally happened barely a decade and a half before Gangster Rap started becoming big time in the music industry.
I remember it, but it was missing the social media component.
I am one of those people who almost always believes in freedom of speech with very few exceptions. But when you bring the internet into it and start really digging into what's happening with gangs, terrorism, politics, etc., I start to wonder if a lot of our old ideals about free speech still hold up.
Kind of like how semi-automatic weapons and mass shootings have reshaped the discussion around the second amendment. The internet has drastically changed how, and how quickly, ideas can be disseminated.
I probably overstated the causation where I meant none, but 51% is a little eyebrow-raising, no? That's much, much, much higher than the baseline homicide-as-cause-of-death rate for young Black Americans.
Incitement of violence has been incredibly limited by the Supreme Court. I think that if this case were brought to the current court, it would not count as inciting violence. It's honestly frustrating how little counts as incitement these days.
But once again, it's broadly legal to restrict most of his rights as someone on parole so it probably doesn't matter.
Please read the article before commenting! The headline is not false, but it is misleading.