If Mort Divine ruled the world

[Dak]

yeah, but white-urban violence has never become the harsh reality black urban violence has

cuzsystemicracismspongebobmeme.jpg

 

[Einherjar86]

Can any metal really be called popularized since the 80s? Especially BM. Thrash was the last genre to sort of hit some mainstream appeal and super well known songs like Master of Puppets or Rust in Peace are a protest against global tyranny or at a minimum (for MoP) manipulative relationships, not glorifying high time preference behaviors.

Well, some extreme metal has become at least as popular as some of the more excessively violent hip hop, plenty of which isn't as popular as N.W.A. (for example). Hip hop is a wide genre, and there are plenty of obscure acts.

But my argument still stands if we simply supplement punk for metal.

Sure, like I said there is a reciprocal relationship. The thug life influenced the hiphop, glorifying itself. Fuck bitches get money popacap. Obviously the literal music alone doesn't "do" anything. But it's an everpresent part of a toxic culture that won't improve simply by cash transfers (if anything cash transfers will encourage the toxicity).

The most important point is that you won't fix the problems of the African American community by eliminating hip hop, which is the implicit suggestion of saying that hip hop is a bigger influence on behavior than historical treatment and social conditions.

 

[Dak]

Well, some extreme metal has become at least as popular as some of the more excessively violent hip hop, plenty of which isn't as popular as N.W.A. (for example). Hip hop is a wide genre, and there are plenty of obscure acts.

But my argument still stands if we simply supplement punk for metal.

"Real" or even "mainstream" punk never made it as popular as hiphop, which is even taking over pop at this point (at least musically).

The most important point is that you won't fix the problems of the African American community by eliminating hip hop, which is the implicit suggestion of saying that hip hop is a bigger influence on behavior than historical treatment and social conditions.

Well it won't fix it alone but it wouldn't hurt if it were removed either. There would need to be an abdication of all high time preference based behaviors (as virtues), which would need a concerted effort of public and private policy (including new hiphop/pop heroes). The more troubling question is if even these shifts can correct for group low IQ problems (low IQs preferring high time preference due to difficulties with estimating future rewards and sustaining future oriented behaviors).

 

[rms]

The most important point is that you won't fix the problems of the African American community by eliminating hip hop, which is the implicit suggestion of saying that hip hop is a bigger influence on behavior than historical treatment and social conditions.

because why would there be middle ground between "doing no good" and "fixing everything"

 

[Einherjar86]

"Real" or even "mainstream" punk never made it as popular as hiphop, which is even taking over pop at this point (at least musically).

I don't think that's accurate. Not at all.

Well it won't fix it alone but it wouldn't hurt if it were removed either.

because why would there be middle ground between "doing no good" and "fixing everything"

So, the conclusion is that eliminating hip hop would be better for the black community?

That's one of the stupidest things you've ever said, Dak. Not one of the stupidest things rms has said, unfortunately.

 

[Dak]

Yeah, the removal of high time preference glorifying entertainment couldn't possibly be positive

Obviously it's not possible. That's beside the point or rather makes it - again.

 

[rms]

Yeah, the removal of high time preference glorifying entertainment couldn't possibly be positive

Ein is just all over the place

 

[Einherjar86]

Yeah, the removal of high time preference glorifying entertainment couldn't possibly be positive

According to this logic, it would be better to eliminate the vast majority of music (anything about smoking pot, having underage sex, drinking, etc.). It's not just unrealistic, it's stupid. Music is a release. You're acting like a puritan.

 

[CiG]

Hip hop isn't just music, this was painful to read through given that everybody seems to be assuming it is about the music.

 

[Einherjar86]

What's painful is that we're actually discussing whether the elimination of hip hop would theoretically improve black communities.

 

[CiG]

I know, I'm being what rms calls "sensationalist."

But what you'd suggest is that hip hop feeds a violent mentality within black communities while metal doesn't (or does to a lesser extent). In order to do that, you'd have to show a) that music carries more weight than other cultural factors, including history and current social conditions; and b) that African Americans, for some reason, don't understand the content of their music as an aesthetic and symbolic element, but as encouraging real behavior, while metal listeners are able to make this distinction (which would carry an implication that metal listeners are more intelligent than hip hop listeners).

Heavy metal contains a comparable amount of transgressive material, and has been linked in the past to notable instances of violence. If we are saying that music is an important cultural factor, then it makes perfect sense that music of all kinds contributes to behavior.

I don't believe this, of course. While there are isolated examples of people seeming to emulate musical artists, I don't think music should be blamed for cultural behaviors; and I think this holds for metal as well as hip hop.

Nothing to do with music. What I think hip hop does to worsen the situation of black Americans, especially those below the middle class, is to give unhealthy male rolemodel figures to young, impressionable black males who are already fighting against the pull to engage in gang activity and are already more often than not dealing with a fatherless upbringing.

These older male rappers slide easily into the male rolemodel slot for a lot of young black guys and if the overwhelming content of mainstream hip hop as well as a lot of non-mainstream hip hop is about holding down your territory, slinging drugs, sexual promiscuity, gang violence, etc and that is coming from people who are filling a male rolemodel void, that is dangerous.

The problem with hip hop is that rappers, who are usually rather financially conservative people behind the scenes, sell a lifestyle of crime, easy money and "realness" to poor people. Hip hop also promotes a don't snitch mentality which directly leads to criminal activity being protected in black communities.

This concept has been talked about for decades within the hip hop culture by the way, people like KRS-One have been trying to fight against this crushing tide of gang glorification within hip hop since it boomed in the late 1980's.

In fact, if Islam can be said to have had any positive contribution to the ethics and morals of a community in the western realm, I would definitely try to make the case for it within hip hop culture. But it's not the majority mentality, especially not in the communities that are below the middle class.

TL;DR it is not about hip hop music, but the culture itself.

 

[rms]

The problem with hip hop is that rappers, who are usually rather financially conservative people behind the scenes

cig what are you smoking

 

[CiG]

Also, many conscious rappers have been making an argument for decades now that hip hop has become a toxic influence on their people which is evidenced by the fact that you can't really make it in hip hop unless you make ignorant music.

Luckily that is actually starting to turn around.

cig what are you smoking

Your mum's tits.

No but seriously, the amount of big name rappers who secretly vote for politicians that want to lower taxes shouldn't really be surprising.

50 Cent raps about the dumbest stuff possible but behind the scenes is actually an articulate businessman that owns confectionery companies and Jay Z has built an empire on being smart with his income.

Consider the RZA from Wu-Tang, the guy is a filmmaker now. The GZA gives short lectures to students about science, these aren't hoodrats even though they may have very likely inspired people to be hoodrats.

 

[Einherjar86]

Nothing to do with music. What I think hip hop does to worsen the situation of black Americans, especially those below the middle class, is to give unhealthy male rolemodel figures to young, impressionable black males who are already fighting against the pull to engage in gang activity and are already more often than not dealing with a fatherless upbringing.

These older male rappers slide easily into the male rolemodel slot for a lot of young black guys and if the overwhelming content of mainstream hip hop as well as a lot of non-mainstream hip hop is about holding down your territory, slinging drugs, sexual promiscuity, gang violence, etc and that is coming from people who are filling a male rolemodel void, that is dangerous.

The problem with hip hop is that rappers, who are usually rather financially conservative people behind the scenes, sell a lifestyle of crime, easy money and "realness" to poor people. Hip hop also promotes a don't snitch mentality which directly leads to criminal activity being protected in black communities.

This concept has been talked about for decades within the hip hop culture by the way, people like KRS-One have been trying to fight against this crushing tide of gang glorification within hip hop since it boomed in the late 1980's.

In fact, if Islam can be said to have had any positive contribution to the ethics and morals of a community in the western realm, I would definitely try to make the case for it within hip hop culture. But it's not the majority mentality, especially not in the communities that are below the middle class.

TL;DR it is not about hip hop music, but the culture itself.

I think I understand what you're saying. You're saying that the power of marketability and the appearance of a certain lifestyle is more appealing than the music. I don't think you're wrong that rappers promote a certain kind of lifestyle, but you can't say that it has "nothing to do with music." To paraphrase Marshall McLuhan, the music is the message. If these rappers are promoting an image that is drastically different from the financially conservative behavior they actually exhibit, then the music is of utmost importance since it's through the music (along with other marketing strategies) that the image you're identifying is visualized.

Also, concerning the question of role models and "ignorant music" (I can't remember who said this, but someone said hip hop is "ignorant"), I'd say that figures like Kanye West and Kendrick Lamar are currently more visible musically speaking than 50 Cent or Jay Z (the latter is controversial; but although J still puts out music, I think he's more influential as a producer at this point). West and Lamar are two very different artists, musically and politically, and yet they're not blindly promoting "high time preference behavior." Lamar's albums in particular are exploding and they're some of the most intellectually stimulating work being put out. Even Tupac's lyrics used to admit the shitty experience of gang lifestyle, fearing that you were going to die every day.

But all of this is beside the point, since I still don't believe that the role model void is the primary reason--above other things like actually living in communities with gang violence and rampant drug use--for problems in the black community, and I think the claim that eliminating hip hop would improve the situation is absolutely absurd. This doesn't mean that it doesn't have an image problem (i.e. concerning role models), but the answer isn't eliminating the music entirely or its thematic content. I think one answer would be promoting more music like Lamar's.

 

[CiG]

I haven't stated that I want or think hip hop should be eliminated, hip hop was overwhelmingly positive for black culture in the 1980's until groups like N.W.A. made it near impossible to make it without promoting gangsterism.

I don't know of Jay Z being a producer, you might be thinking of someone else or maybe I'm just ignorant to what he's doing - but my overall point is that rappers are selling ignorance to audiences in the overwhelming majority of cases and have been doing so since the 1990's while they themselves often actually live in more normal circumstances and I think that's sick.

To me it stinks of blacks in the past selling other blacks into slavery. But of course I would never suggest that hip hop should be essentially deleted from existence lmao.

And I agree about Kendrick Lamar and others, which is why I said things are beginning to turn around somewhat, though mumble rap is also booming and that is a style of hip hop that barely even speaks full English words.

When I said it's not about the music, I should have been more clear, what I meant was it is not the music on its own that is doing anything to anybody, which is why I think the metal comparison doesn't equate because lyrics alone do not do much to people - but rather the culture that surrounds the music, so in that case sure punk is a much better comparison except that most punks probably don't live in similar socio-economic situations with blacks in America.

A huge chunk of punk culture is just bourgeois kids rebelling against stuffy former generations. Hardcore punk and grindcore was born from middle class kids, kids who whether they like it or not mostly grew up in households with in-tact nuclear families where the parents had jobs before they had kids, it's a very different situation.

Boy, we do fucking talk about black people a lot though. I'm starting to feel bad about this honestly.

 

[Einherjar86]

I haven't stated that I want or think hip hop should be eliminated, hip hop was overwhelmingly positive for black culture in the 1980's until groups like N.W.A. made it near impossible to make it without promoting gangsterism.

That's true, you didn't. Some others here have suggested that it could theoretically improve the situation, or that if it had never happened we would be better off. I think both are ridiculous sentiments.

I don't know of Jay Z being a producer, you might be thinking of someone else or maybe I'm just ignorant to what he's doing - but my overall point is that rappers are selling ignorance to audiences in the overwhelming majority of cases and have been doing so since the 1990's while they themselves often actually live in more normal circumstances and I think that's sick.

Jay Z has his hands in everything, record studios and film production. He oversees a lot of shit, and while his name might not always show up as "producer" on the label, he's basically a de facto producer at this point.

When I said it's not about the music, I should have been more clear, what I meant was it is not the music on its own that is doing anything to anybody, which is why I think the metal comparison doesn't equate because lyrics alone do not do much to people - but rather the culture that surrounds the music, so in that case sure punk is a much better comparison except that most punks probably don't live in similar socio-economic situations with blacks in America.

Okay, but this is basically the same thing I've been saying. It's the culture, yes--by which I mean our culture, the entirety of it, because, as Dak mentioned, rap and hip hop sells just as widely among whites. American culture is also responsible for the kinds of social roles deemed appropriate for African Americans, which is why fiscally responsible African Americans recede into the background. I don't mean deemed in any intentional sense, this isn't going on behind closed doors. Have you seen the movie Get Out? It deals with this topic really, really well. And it's a fucking good movie.

There's also so much good literature on this; the first thing that comes to mind is Claudia Rankine's Citizen, in which she talks about Serena Williams's perceived image in popular American culture. Marketability influences how celebrities conduct themselves, and it also dictates what consumers (are allowed to) want.

Rap and hip hop are a part of culture, but they're not the primary reason for things like gang violence, even if it feeds into them to some minute degree.

Here's my main argument:

My original point was that you can't blame music for criminal activity, and that if we're going to isolate the causal factor to the music itself then it makes no more sense to say hip hop is responsible for crime than it does to say that metal is. You're defining hip hop more broadly, though, as a wider set of cultural behaviors/conditions. I would agree that those conditions give rise to criminal behavior, I just wouldn't call them "hip hop conditions," or something like that. I would say that those conditions preceded the emergence of hip hop and, in fact, gave rise to genres like hip hop and rap. Those genres are a cultural response to preexisting conditions, and eliminating the music won't eliminate the conditions, or even improve them (theoretically). There's absolutely no way to distinguish between gang members who got involved in crime because of hip hop and those who would have joined gangs anyway due to other social pressures; I'd say that the former group is probably so small as to be negligible.

In many cases, it's likely that hip hop actually serves as an outlet for troubled youth (like punk did). They might experience some pressure to commit crimes, or violent fantasies; but music gives them a way to vicariously exercise those fantasies without resorting to actual violence.

There's no doubt that hip hop is a powerful cultural force, but I'm doubtful that it's a larger causal factor for negative behavior than other social conditions.

 

[Dak]

When I said hiphop I'm not referring to an assembly of beats or rhythms. I'm talking about culture, lyrics, presentation, etc. Obviously one could rap about a variety of topics and not promote high time preference behaviors in lyrics, video, etc. Call me puritanical if you want, but people are dying every day in Chicago trying to live out lifestyles glorified on the radio. Conversely, we don't have Swedes loading up into wooden boats with swords and heading for English shores. It's obvious we can't ban music, but that doesn't mean you can't refer to it negatively.

While psychological or sociological research has never been able to tie consumption of various media to criminal histories, there is research to suggest that the "cathartic" notion of music you are referring to is not supported.

http://blog.uwgb.edu/alltherage/four-questions-on-the-catharsis-myth-with-dr-brad-bushman/

 

[Einherjar86]

When I said hiphop I'm not referring to an assembly of beats or rhythms. I'm talking about culture, lyrics, presentation, etc. Obviously one could rap about a variety of topics and not promote high time preference behaviors in lyrics, video, etc. Call me puritanical if you want, but people are dying every day in Chicago trying to live out lifestyles glorified on the radio. Conversely, we don't have Swedes loading up into wooden boats with swords and heading for English shores. It's obvious we can't ban music, but that doesn't mean you can't refer to it negatively.

Of course not, but I would be wary of ever adopting prescriptive attitudes toward particular content. We can say things like "N.W.A. depicts some controversial material in their music, maybe it's a good idea to intervene among listeners in order to counteract potential negative consequences (to the best of our ability)." That's more appropriate than suggesting that N.W.A.'s music is aesthetically and politically inferior to other art forms.

You might very well believe it is inferior in many ways, but that doesn't do anyone else any good.

While psychological or sociological research has never been able to tie consumption of various media to criminal histories, there is research to suggest that the "cathartic" notion of music you are referring to is not supported.

http://blog.uwgb.edu/alltherage/four-questions-on-the-catharsis-myth-with-dr-brad-bushman/

Two things:

First, that post doesn't mention music at all.

Second (and more important), that post contains a massive misconception that catharsis refers specifically to something that "feels good." That's not true at all, and anyone who knows the actual definition of catharsis knows that. Catharsis refers to the relief from unwanted emotions, but that doesn't mean the object that produces catharsis "feels good."

In fact, most people listen to depressing music when feeling sad. That's not because depressing music feels good to listen to. The process is more complicated than that.

 

[Dak]

First, that post doesn't mention music at all.

Second (and more important), that post contains a massive misconception that catharsis refers specifically to something that "feels good." That's not true at all, and anyone who knows the actual definition of catharsis knows that. Catharsis refers to the relief from unwanted emotions, but that doesn't mean the object that produces catharsis "feels good."

In fact, most people listen to depressing music when feeling sad. That's not because depressing music feels good to listen to. The process is more complicated than that.

It doesn't mention music specifically, but I'm referring to this comment:

In many cases, it's likely that hip hop actually serves as an outlet for troubled youth (like punk did). They might experience some pressure to commit crimes, or violent fantasies; but music gives them a way to vicariously exercise those fantasies without resorting to actual violence.

An outlet, ie venting.

In 1973, Albert Bandura issued a moratorium on catharsis theory and the use of venting in therapy, and research evidence supported Bandura’s views (e.g., Geen & Quanty, 1977). Venting doesn’t work even among people who believe in the value of venting, and even among people who report feeling better after venting (Bushman, Baumeister, & Stack, 1999). In fact, venting has the opposite effect—it increases aggression. The better people feel after venting, the more aggressive they are. Venting can even increase aggression against innocent bystanders.

The specific definition of catharsis might refer to emotions in general, but anger/frustration is one kind of emotion and the one that has been the focus of(afaik) the most research done as it relates to catharsis theory.

 

[Einherjar86]

Wow, that's fascinating. Well, I have to take back that comment then.

Does this only hold for anger/aggression? Because I feel like the trend would be different for depression (i.e. that listening to depressing music alleviates depression in a subject)--or is that wrong too?