JackKieser

And that post is actually very accurate... it's just not what we're talking about. I've already said pages ago that dance music and rap are not always the same. Remember: maybe the 1 or 2 best or most catchy songs from an artist or album make it to the club, while the rest stay on the CD (or, preferably, digital download). Just because the songs in the club don't talk about how shooting people who aren't in your gang is just a fun time for all, that doesn't mean that the other 9-14 songs per album don't... and this whole discussion is about how violence and drugs have pervaded the majority of rap, culturally speaking. I do agree with what you've quoted, but I don't think what you quoted is actually relevant to the discussion. Sure, but music, like all other forms of media, needs to realize the profound cultural influence it has. Just because you CAN do something does not mean you should, and most forms of media still need to learn this lesson. The news needs to learn it by not operating on a fear-based economy; you can report the news in an opinionated way, you are free to, but that doesn't mean it will have a positive effect on the news sphere or on the public. Movies can put out nothing but ultra-violent summer blockbusters, but that doesn't mean they should, because the realm of movies influences popular culture more than almost any other passive media. Video games can put out same-y, me-too sequels and clones, but that doesn't mean they should, because they are a burgeoning art from and still need to prove themselves in the court of public opinion (and to the Supreme Court, apparently). Rap has to learn that they can support a culture based on monetary gain, violence, and drug use, but that doesn't mean they should, because its going to have a deeply negative effect on the people that rap is supposed to care about the most: its primary listeners and creators. Ok, first of all, haha. Second, arguing about things is one of the only ways people are subjected to opinions that differ from their own, which is always a good thing. Believe it or not, I have experienced quite a bit from this thread, things I will, in fact, take away with me when the debate is long finished. But, just because most people here disagree with me doesn't mean I don't deeply appreciate the disagreement or the discourse. I need that discourse to experience viewpoints that are not my own and grow as an intellectual. Sometimes, people forget that it's ok to disagree. Strange how that works on a discussion forum.

You know why I do that? Because it's that same flimsy logic that lets people get away with calling people fascists, or terrorists, or communists (as if it was a bad thing) without anything other than saying "because you're not a patriot". What you're accusing me of is a serious offense, even on the internet. And if you can't accuse me of it without saying "well, I mean, it's not something I can point to", then you have no business accusing me of it at all. Seriously, your argument sounds like the same half-assed intellectualism I hear on Fox News/MSNBC all the time. News flash: name calling, especially a name as bad as "racist", does not win you arguments. Bullshit. I can extrapolate an easy way to tell if someone is being racist or not. You are saying racist things if they: A ) focus on the color of skin. B ) exclude all other variables except a racial genetic background (especially pertaining to skin color). C ) ignore complexities of argument in favor of simplistic arguments based on skin color. Sure, I'm the one making those guidelines, so I could be biased. But to the extent of my knowledge, you can only be racist towards blacks, Mexicans, Asians, Indians, or generally people who are not white (based off of your own two links), which indicates that racism is at least peripherally linked to skin color (but more importantly, racial background). If you want to add to the list or make modifications, feel free, although I doubt this is the thread to do it in. Again, did I ever say that rap's problems were systemic to black people, mexican people, or any one race in particular? NO. I even took special care to use the term "inner city", because most of the problems are systemic social problems that originated from social class, not race! You can be an inner city person regardless of race. Well, if I was being close-minded, I would. Unfortunately for the both of us, I was commenting on a very specific problem that, again, I saw as indicative of a culture as a whole. If my rejection of a simplistic "fuck it, that's how things are" attitude makes me close-minded, so be it. I'm sorry for asking a community of people to better themselves? It'd be nice if the people flaming me could at least acknowledge that they've been acting especially hateful as I pointed out a few posts ago, but I doubt that'll happen. ^_- Not once have I ever said, in this thread or any other, that one isn't entitled to his opinion. If I rememeber correctly... *looks at rest of thread* ...yeah, I haven't been the one calling names and telling people to fuck off. Interesting how that works.

Very mature. Thanks for adding to the discussion. And for calling me a dick in white text. If you're going to do it, at least have the balls to do it in a text color that can be read. Those two posts don't actually prove anything, nor do they help your argument. First of all, I don't accept any argument of "you know it when you see it" because I'm a scientist; if it can't be proven, it doesn't exist. So, this notion of "well, you're obviously a racist, but we can't actually prove that; you'll just have to trust us" is bullshit, and shouldn't even be taken at face value. Second, because of the way the word's been used in this thread, I'd say that, even when playing by YOUR OWN RULES, you're closer to the guy using the term "racism" in the cheap, shallow sense, because you're: A ) ignoring the contextual information, instead basing your claim of "racism" on the assumption that I'm talking only about black people and that I have some vendetta against them and B ) ignoring the multi-faceted cultural background that influences rap as a genre, instead forcefully limiting the concepts of "violence" and "drug use" to black people in an attempt to make me seem like a racist. So, if anything, even if I play your OWN game, you're still the ones looking uneducated. And what's worse is that, out of the next 5 posts, I'll probably get 4 telling me to shut up, go away, stop being racist, or that I'm a moron, and maybe 1 intelligent, thought-provoking post that tries to quote my own previous posts in an attempt to refute me. Either that, or the thread will be closed, and somehow it will be my fault. I'm trying to have an intelligent discussion, and all I get in return are flames. Try to stay on topic from now on. We're talking, in case you forgot, about vulgarity in rap music.

Oh, christ, the race card. Really, people? Seriously? Prove through my posts that I have some problem with *insert race here* (because I really don't know which race I'm supposed to be against here; there are white, black, and mexican/latino rappers... hell, I've heard an asian guy rap once). Do you hear me saying "black rappers have to clean up"? No, I'm saying rap as a subculture needs to clean up. If I were you, I'd feel really stupid for saying something that short-sighted.

So, threads here don't devolve into ad ad hominem attacks on Jack Kieser? Ab56 - Talked about my "white guilt", not any of my actual points. chthonic -Talked about the number of words in my posts, not any of my actual points. Arek - Called me an attention whore, didn't talk about any of my actual points. At least DiggiDis brought up a valid point. One I will respond to. A ) Just because other people have done or said A, B, or C, that doesn't absolve rappers from it, nor does that give them an excuse to do it, too. It's wrong for anyone to do drugs or be violent. But my argument isn't based on individuals, it's based on culture. Rock, for instance, is no longer a culture built upon drugs the way it was 40 years ago. B ) Even giving you the benefit of the doubt, my argument in this thread has been about a pervasive mindset towards violence and drugs, one that is conveyed positively by the artists. You will always be able to name drop people who do bad things. But, I dare you to prove that Stevie Ray, for instance, sang most of his songs about how awesome his cocaine was, and how others should do cocaine, too; most of his songs were about love. And I never heard James Brown sing about how good it was to hit his wife. Even so, you assembled a motley crew of artists from different genres across nearly 40 years. Not only could twice the examples be found for rap artists from just the last decade, it'd all be from one genre (obviously). I think that's indicative of a more ingrained problem. Of course, other genres have had their rocky pasts, but rock, blues, R&B, all of them moved past those rocky pasts, and now they aren't wholly categorized by bad shit. In the 60's, you thought of rock and roll and automatically thought of drugs. Now, you don't. Because rock grew up and cleaned itself up. I think it's rap's turn to mature itself. C ) Don't bring up religion. Nothing will EVER come close to the atrocities committed by organized religion, Christianity in particular. Ever. In any sense. Religion is a horrible culture, and nothing rap does, has done, or will do, can ever compare to it. So... that's not a fair comparison.

Heh, I'm not forgetting anything. I enjoy looking for people to educate about my favorite pasttime, even if the cost is that some people occasionally say bad things about me... T_T [/sarcastic_crying] But, hey, that's not everyone's cup of tea, and I respect that. But, everyone should be prepared for when what they hold dear is challenged by someone else. I'm lucky, because the group I'm a part of has 2 or 3 bad eggs, but the majority of the facts say that we have nothing to be ashamed of. Rap, unfortunately, doesn't have that bonus. It has a checkered past and enough unsavory individuals to last a lifetime, so if someone goes up to the rappers you mentioned after a show (or when I discuss with you whether rap is responsible or irresponsible with the media power it's given) and brings up that checkered past, or those unsavory individuals, they actually have to DEFEND being a part of a culture like that. Honestly, I feel sorry for rappers with actual good hearts who just love the music... They have to spend their time defending themselves with so little to work with. But, hey, that's the price they pay, I suppose. Anyway, good debate. I enjoyed it (when it was actually on topic). Hopefully, rap will clean itself up and pick itself up off the floor, as far as musical cultures are concerned. Rap used to be a really honorable genre, and it really does suck, as a lover of music, to see an entire genre degraded because of some perverse love of gold chains and drugs. I really do wish it the best, but I really hope the "fuck it" attitude goes away soon, and the entire culture, listeners and creators alike, start acting a little more responsibly. It'd really suck if, 50 years from now, rap is still stuck in the inner cities, full of gangs and god knows what else, all because no one cared enough to try to better the community. And I hope people on OCRemix who actually still like rap despite its flaws can use this thread to discuss ways to try to better their community.

And you know what, that's totally understandable. That's why I wouldn't kick them in the balls if I ever met them on the street, like I would do to about 95% of mainstream rappers. I don't blame them, but, again, if you want to call yourself a member of a culture, if these guys want to call themselves "rappers", then they have to accept the mantle and pedigree that brings with it, good OR bad, and if they don't like it, they have to take as many steps as they can to fix the problem. I'm a "gamer", and I call myself that regularly. That means I have to accept the mantle and pedigree of Columbine, which many people blame on Doom. I have to accept that people are going to assume (especially if they are on the right) that I'm a trigger-happy nutjob who would rather headshot you than talk to you thanks to all my late night hooker killing. And as a gamer, its my job to re-inform people when they make that mistaken judgment, and its also my job to do my part within the community and outside the community to win hearts and minds. i talk with other gamers (and I've talked to game DESIGNERS, too) regularly about gratuitous violence in games and about the need for more artistic games, and about the need to stop buying piece of crap Wii games, and about a whole slew of other gaming-related social topics. I have to do the same thing to religious nutcases who rag on me because I'm an atheist (and I rag on atheists who don't stand up to fix our own social inferiority complex the same way I'm ragging on these rappers). There are other ways to be an activist, you know. Or not, because every time I talk about it on OCRemix, someone yells "LOL ACTIVISM". I'm still waiting for Darkesword to post that "LOL JACK KIESER" picture or close down the thread. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, though. ^_-

Ok, giving these guys the benefit of the doubt that they're rapping about the problems because they're musicians and that's what they do... ...how many of them have gone on the news to talk about rap's problems? How many have held rallies? How many have started charities? How many have DONATED to charities? How many have done ANYTHING significant, like testified to the Senate, or started a non-profit, or created an organization, or anything outside of rapping? Look, they're doing something, and that's better than nothing; they're making an effort, and its obvious that they care. But, seriously here, these are rappers. These are the inside guys. If they can't draw significant attention to even the problems that they are involved with, especially in the 21st century with the internet and the 24hr news machine, they're doing it wrong. And, hey, if you don't agree with my methods, fine. After all, I have plenty of other genres that I can listen to. Especially thanks to this site. I don't really feel like I'm missing out on that much.

Well, that's because I have a very "zero-tolerance" policy when it comes to things that can be influenced financially. This is supposed to be a "capitalist, free-market" society, right? Besides, I can tell from your post that you obviously aren't even READING my posts anymore. I said AT THE TOP, IN THE FIRST FEW SENTENCES that my main point of contention ISN'T actually censorship. It's activism and the community mindset. You listen to rap music? Do you like lyrics with MEANINGLESS violence (not Tupac's meaningful interpretations and presentations, but 50's "I'm going to shoot you, kill your fellow singers, and leave your mangled corpse on the floor") and POSITIVE VIEWS on drug use? If not, what do you do about it? If all you do is go, "meh, that's rap", you're a part of the problem. Do you know why social change is brought about by things like boycotts, sit-ins, and the like? Because the people who are acting in a way you want to change don't care in the first place, so you have to get their peers to care, and get THEM to act. Look at civil rights. Blacks didn't get equal treatment by appealing to the bigots. They got civil rights by appealing to the rational people, and when that didn't work, you stopped giving even the RATIONAL people money, so that it was in THEIR best interest to have change, too. Hence, sit-ins and full-spectrum boycotts. Change from within. You think the people who actually give rap a bad name are going to give a rat's ass about cleaning up their culture? No, because they're either: A ) too stoned to care B ) have too much money to care C ) are too busy being shot at / shooting people to care (I realize those are oversimplifications. It's for effect.) So, you know how you get them to clean up their act? Stop giving money to the GOOD rappers, and tell them that they'll get your money when they get their contemporaries to clean up. BAM, that shit gets cleaned up fast. Like I said, if you aren't part of the solution, you're part of the problem. I'm part of the solution by exercising my capitalist voting power and not buying ANY rap music, and by talking about these problems and starting discussions when possible. I'm doing SOMETHING, which is better than your "lassez-faire", "fuck it" attitude. Again, rap is supposed to be a community, a culture. If one section is corrupt, all of them are, and it's EVERY rapper's responsibility to make sure the problem is dealt with. (So yes, even insightful rapper's contributions are meaningless if they aren't trying to fix the problem) I'm a gamer; if I found out that MLG was laundering money, I wouldn't go to ANY gaming tournaments, conventions, or events until it was cleaned up. Same here. And, for the record, I just had a lovely discussion with someone who has been completely impartial about this whole debate so far (because she hadn't been a part of it; I don't know her personally, but my girlfriend does, and she was on FB at the time). She's very indy, likes rap, and is pretty knowledgeable about the Seattle, WA indy rap scene. I asked her 2 questions. A ) Does rap culture, either mainstream or indy, have a problem with violence or drug addiction? This includes the actual lyrics, as well as the rappers personally. B ) If so, would rap culture benefit from internal activism, such as rappers holding charitable events to benefit internal problems (i.e., freestyle for inner city education or something), or would it benefit the culture as a whole more to leave all drug / violence problems as it is? I did not tell her which side I was on, only asked her opinion as a lover and listener of rap music, mainstream and indy. She answered the affirmative on both counts. So, I'll ask more people as I can, but I REALLY just think this forum has an attitude problem, because I can't imagine any other reason a whole board worth of people would say its ok for even a facet of an entire culture to be ok with killing its members and doing illegal drugs.

Dude, you have NO IDEA how serious sometimes. EDIT: Hey, you changed "The internet" to "Internet arguments". Not cool. Either way, yeah, the internet can be serious business. See: the extent to which the internet is having an effect on political outcomes, i.e., 2008. EDIT2: Man, I'm still surprised there's not ONE PERSON so far who thinks that the rap community could use some cleaning up through member-oriented activism. I mean, not ONE. Maybe it really is just the "fuck it" attitude of the boards, because when I discuss this with people IRL, I at least get a few people who think the culture could use a bit of work.

Hey, if they're weak, so be it... but you know, it takes counter-argument to find that out, not just saying they are. ...just sayin'.

*sigh* Ok, let's run through this one more time. I've already said that restrictions on content could work, but would be impractical. After all, there are content restrictions on nearly every art form already... just, most of them are from internal ratings boards, instead of the government. It could work, but it'd be really hard. What I'm more concerned about here is the general "fuck it" attitude that I get from most people concerning the subject matter of rap music, and yes, I do mean in particular. Music is a big part of my life, and of my family's life (multiple of my family members are musicians, and 8 years of choir gave me the deep appreciation for music I have now), and so I've been listening to as much of it as I can for most of my life. Rock can be bad sometimes (especially metal), but NOTHING I have ever heard comes close to the level of lyrical violence or drug promotion than rap; as I said before, it's what made me stop listening to it. The problem I see is that not only do most general listeners of rap not care, but the artists themselves don't either! The best comparison I can make is that of the Catholic Church. My grandparents are Catholic, and not once have they spoke out in protest of priests who rape kids. They are a member of a society that commits atrocities, and not only do they not care, they accept it as commonplace and let it continue! Rap gets away with a lot of shit. What other musical genre has the history of rampant violence and drug use that rap does? Especially with no repercussions? Personally, I can't understand why ANYONE would want to be a part of it. But, here we have a whole subculture who can literally sit back and watch fellow artists OD and kill themselves, or shoot each other in gang warfare, and not once, not a single time, do I see, hear, or read about a large or significant portion of the culture standing up and saying to their fellow artists "we aren't going to tolerate this sort of behavior anymore." Where is the activism? Where is the responsibility? With whom does it lie? And, if you're a rapper, how many times have you protested gang violence? Drug use? How many times have you told your culture to better itself? To clean up? Why allow it to continue? What's the point? I'm constantly told that rappers write about what they know. Ok, so right now, they know violence and drugs. But, is that a good thing? Should your fellow rappers, especially ones in poverty or hooked on drugs, stay like that? Should young rappers continue to experience those horrors, those atrocities? And, again, how many rappers start foundations for inner city kids, or rap about how they COULD have bought another Escalade, but instead donated the money to charity? Are you getting the message yet? The point? DCT says, sarcastically, that he was doing drugs when he posted, which means, I assume, that you rap. Do you realize that you're responsible for what the members of your culture do by associating with them? Again, how many rallies have you hosted, or charities have you given to, or events have you participated in to clean up rap culture? Because if the answer is anything less than "a lot", you're doing every rapper you are associated with a disservice. And that goes for everyone who LISTENS to rap, too. Part of why I don't listen to rap is because I don't want to financially support drug habits and gang killings. Even the Indy scene. I don't want to have anything to do with it. And you shouldn't, either. I don't care if you really, really need music to dance to. Would you buy music if you knew the proceeds would directly fund terrorism? Then, why would you give money to a culture that promotes and engages in rampant violence and drug use? Everyone is responsible for this, and yet, no outrage. It's ridiculous. So, Vagrance, my point is that you'd have to be purposefully disillusioning yourself to think that rap, as a CULTURE, doesn't have serious problems, and yet no one cares. I see rock concerts for freaking Africa, and yet there are no large rap concerts even for their own internal problems. It's all "I need to get money for my drugs" and "man, look at how nice my Escalade/spinning rims/necklace is". When will people who care about rap music start caring about the people who make it?

That's what I'm trying to say, though: the problem is so bad, it's not even necessary. Yes, if I was writing a formal paper to present to a Senate sub-commitee, I would do the hard research, but for an informal internet debate, I don't even need to do it, because even the most rudimentary, common-sense information supports my point. Seriously, do a Google search. Look it up. It's disgusting. You don't even have to look deep or hard. Fuck, two of the genre's most prolific rappers were killed by gang violence! Do I need to cite that source?

And I love getting into philosophical debates with members of the OCRemix forums. Every single one is filled with non sequitur attacks on my character, instead of arguments that actually counter the ones I make. Seriously, it's getting old, all of this hate just because I'm not a regular member of the community. So I don't make Remixes or post often; doesn't mean I'm not making a valid point. @above: It's a matter of statistics. Does every single rap artist do drugs or shoot people? No. But name the music genre that has more news stories about drug offenses or violent acts than rap. Again, it's not like I even have to do hard research on this; do a Google search for "rap shooting", and you'll get tons of news articles about various rappers being shot or shooting other rappers.

Wait, so you're telling me that rich, successful music artists DON'T do drugs? And that rap culture isn't one of the most, if not the single most, violent cultures in music? How many gospel artists have been involved in shootings? Soul? R&B? Classical? Fuck, rock and heavy metal artists aren't involved in as many gang shootings as rap artists are. Rap artists being violent and doing drugs isn't a fantasy; it's quite the reality.

Oh, please CHRIST, tell me that's a joke... I can't wait that long.

I was just explaining why, exactly, I don't consider Internet debate a waste of time, is all. An actual reason was a better reply than just posting " Nuh uuuuuuhhhhh!!!11 >_<", basically. Oh, also forgot to explain, my picking-apart post style comes from Smashboards. That's just how they post, and much of my debating is done there, so I picked up the style. Sorry if it's a pain to read sometimes, but it's a very accurate way to respond to posts, point by point.

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm a philosophy major. Specifically, I study ethics. So, none of this is a waste of time. Thanks for caring, though...?

You know... If you don't like it, you can, I don't know... ...not read the thread? Read another thread? If we didn't want to go back and forth, we wouldn't post. Maybe you should stop worrying about us, perhaps?

Ok, this is on my iPod touch, so bear with me. It's probably going to be shorter and less composed than my other posts. First of all, you claim that it's difficult to differentiate between lyrics like those of the tupac song you posted and the 50 cent song I posted. I beg to differ. Both songs deal with violence (I presume gang violence), but tupac's deal with violence done to HIM, while 50 talks about violence he will commit. Big difference, because remember that we are talking about the light subject matter is presented in. It's hard to think that Tupac is talking about being shot as thouh it's a good thing due to his language, while it's rather easy to infer that 50 would be very pleased with his work after shooting and violently killing eminem. You also claim that it's hard to restrict one without restricting the other, something else I disagree with... Kind of. While I think it would be possible with something as simple as a ratings board that has more ratings than 2 (which is how music is rated now: either ok or restricted), the movie industry rating system shows us how easily those systems can be corrupted by extremists. And thanks to the religious right, we can't just give the job to judges or gov't officials. I do, however, think that a restriction system more faceted than what we have now, with clear rulings, would work. All you'd have to do is say that there is a ban om music that promotes human rights violations (I'd say a death threat, fake or not, is a human rights violation; everyone has the right to their life, once born).

And why, exactly, is that? Because you don't have anything to add to the discussion? At least 3 people in this thread are having civilized, meaningful debate here. But, you're right. You don't think we should be discussing this, so I guess we should stop. ...O WAI--

Actually, having government intervention in free speech is not unorthodox. Aside from the "fire" example I've used previously, one cannot, for example, hold a rally and say that he or others will/should lynch some black guy. That's hate speech, and hate speech is illegal. Porn is expression, and it is limited and regulated heavily. I think you're taking a very idealistic view of what "freedom of speech" means, one that I will address while I pick at The Vagrance's post below. Again, it doesn't matter who I'm referencing. They are rappers, and they aren't even older than a decade; this is still recent as far as history is concerned. You're assuming that the only rap music listened to is in clubs. While I'm sure the top 1 or 2 songs are listened to in clubs as dance aids, that still means there are 9-14 other songs per album that probably AREN'T listened to expressly for dancing. And I'm willing to bet most of them deal with drugs and murder in a positive light. I'll expand in a moment. I did I basic Google search just before writing this post, and found an article listing rap songs (specifically) that deal with drugs, positively or not (I didn't have time to search through every song's lyrics). This article was posted at the end of 2009. Want to know how many songs deal with drugs, NOT including weed or alcohol? That's probably not even an exhaustive list, either. And that's not even the list that deals with murder and cop killing! Oh, and by the way, rapping about how awesome it is being a drug DEALER is totally better than rapping about doing drugs. You know, because dealers only sell the drugs to the inner city kids who are getting badly influenced anyway. We're not talking about me. We're talking about disillusioned inner city kids. Also, if you disagree with any restriction of free speech, that means you're A-OK with hate speech, too. Is that actually the case, or do you REALLY believe that certain kinds of "free speech" should be restricted for human rights / public safety concerns? So, are you then saying that, as long as what you're doing is a performance, you can do anything you want, no matter how publicly damaging it is or how many human rights violations you espouse? It's ok to say, for instance, that people should be able to be sold as slaves as long as you do it in a song, dance, or play? I mean, seriously tell people that they should capture their neighbor and sell him as a slave? Interestingly enough, the lyrics of FPB don't actually talk about murder as though its a GOOD thing. Johnny Cash speaks in verse 2 as though he feels remorse for the murder, or it can be interpreted that way. I don't see how else other than in a positive light you can interpret the lyric: "My gun is loaded with about enuff for your whole crew 1 shot kills u and the others die at the sight of you your mangled body lying in a heap on the floor Aint got anuff time to go say goodbye to your whore" --Candy Rap (50 Cent/Eminem) Also, I used to listen to a lot of rap back when it was mainly stuff like Run DMC and Grand Master Flash. Not so much anymore. 3 guesses why. You can drop out if you run away from home to join a gang, and yes the parents SHOULD be less shitty. But, again, try controlling a kid who is constantly high and/or owns a gun that he got illegally. There comes a point to where locking your kid up is the only option, and that's no option for a kid. You're right, it's intended for people between the ages of 16-25, if the way marketing campaigns work is to be believed. Those aret he people with the buying power. Either way, its irrelevant. We aren't talking about some Ted Kaczynski motherfucker here. This isn't a singular instance or a stray statistic. How many gangs are in NY? LA? The entire US? That's all well and good, philosophically, but PRACTICALLY, you can't just call them assholes and have everything be fine. Try saying that to the victim's families of gang warfare, or the parents of some 17 year old inner city kid who thought it was fine to OD on crack. "Sorry, the society influencing your kid and telling him it was ok to shoot at police officers was just filled with assholes." You're right! That makes it ok! What was I thinking? You're totally right. I mean, it's kind of like the banks and financial institutions, right? It's not like they are some giant monolith that is uncontrollable. People run the banks and ultimately it all falls to the will of the people. If they want their money invested in toxic assets that are proven beforehand to have devastating long term effects on the economy, then its their god-given right to put the entire country at risk in the process. After all, free market, right? You know what your problem is here? You, and the people who think that everything should be protected regardless of circumstance or the situation at hand, have a broken idea of what it means to be free. I have free speech, which means I'm free to say whatever I want... as long as it doesn't infringe on other's rights or endanger people publicly. Also, I have the good sense and character to realize that just because you have a freedom, that doesn't mean that you should always exercise it. Do you know what the best definition of democracy that I've ever heard was? Democracy is putting yourself in chains, and if you can't do it for yourself, your neighbor will do it for you. It used to be legal to talk about lynching some nigger, and it used to be legal to own people as property, and it used to be legal to deny basic human rights to people because of gender, and it still is legal to deny basic human rights to people because of sexual preference. Plenty of stupid shit was and is legal. Times change. Rappers, particularly ones like those listed above, cannot put themselves in chains. They cannot stop promoting a gangster culture that things it's not only ok, but satisfactory to do or sell copious amounts of drugs and kill other people, sometimes for as little as having better lyrics than you. If they can't put themselves in the chains, I'm afraid it's up to the rest of us to do it for them.

First of all, you're focusing too much on the cursing. As I said in previous posts, hearing or saying "fuck" every now and again doesn't make you a serial killer or anything. The problem I'm trying to address is the sexism, misogyny, anti-establishment philosophies, and drug use. Say whatever you want about indy rap, because I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about mainstream rap songs that not only profess a love of but insist a near fanatical devotion to: *rampant sex, sometimes inferring that it would be done against, to some small degree, the woman's choosing *the violent murder of police officers or other public or government officials *either a desire to do large amounts of highly illegal substances, or a worldview that espouses the acquisition and use of illegal substances in large quantities Rape, the killing of cops, and doing illegal drugs IS against the law, and many mainstream rap songs not only say that the artist himself does any of those things, but implies that those who also do those things is just as awesome/badass as the artist himself. Say what you will, but that's encouraging people to do illegal things. I'm with you so far. Just letting you know. Ok, here's where I have beef. Talking about fire isn't illegal, is it? No, it's not. Talking in a theater isn't illegal, either. Simply talking about fire in a crowded theater isn't even illegal... but yelling about it at the top of your lungs is. Why is that? Because people, especially crowds, get easily confused or mislead. Yell something like that, and SOMEONE is bound to think that there is an actual fire, and a panic will ensue. Thus, yelling "fire" in a crowded theater is illegal, even though yelling about anything IS A CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED ACT. Apply this to rap. Writing a song isn't illegal. Talking about drugs or murder isn't, either. But what happens when you start yelling that it's ok to (and sometimes, that you should go out of your way to) do as many illegal drugs as you can and kill police officers if they bother you? And what happens if the person doing the yelling is a respected music artist with millions of followers and a boatload of money? Someone who says he does those things and is also rich and successful? What happens if you give that music to poor inner city kids who dropped out of school at 13 to join a gang, also because they heard gangs were the shit in a song? What I think you aren't realizing is that, as in the case of a crowded theater, not everyone is a smart or analytical as you. If someone yells "FIRE!" in a theater you're in, you'll probably look around before you panic. Lots of people won't. Same with rap. You'll probably think, as you have, "Well, this is all probably blown out of proportion anyway. Besides, I know doing drugs and killing cops is bad." But I'd put 10$ on the line RIGHT THE FUCK NOW that many inner city kids without proper backgrounds or education won't do that. They'll see their parents doing it, their friends doing it, and hear their rapper role models saying to do it, and god damn it, they'll do it, whether "it" is killing, drugs, or whatever. Again, what you seem to be missing is that what I'm trying to discuss is whether or not there are things that art should not be able to talk about. You can paint about the Holocaust, but should you be able to paint about it being RIGHT? You can write a book about terrorism, but should you be able to write a book telling people they should blow up government buildings? And, you can write a song, but should you be able to write a song telling people to force sex on women, kill police officers at the slightest provocation, and do as many drugs as you can? Again, focusing too much on the cursing, dude. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to insinuate that media has an influence on people's thought processes.

I would assume that people ignore you because while your message may be a very nice, Pleasantville, positive worldview (one I commend, BTW), it doesn't actually add anything to the PRACTICAL discussion. As was said a few pages back, this is a DISCUSSION THREAD in a DISCUSSION FORUM about a topic that we'd like to DISCUSS. People who say, essentially, "this shouldn't be discussed" should be ignored. Also, to all those saying, "Art is art, man. *takes a puff* It is what it is. Don't question it. Just take it in. *takes another puff*", that's also not meaningful to the discussion, either. "Art is art" is an argument I tore to shreds last page. Besides, the issue isn't whether art should be allowed to do A, B, or C, because art can do whatever the hell it wants to do. The issue is, should people be allowed, legally or socially, to do whatever they damn well please just by invoking the "art card"? Should you be able to say, show, or do anything you want with the protection that being art affords if you, when all of the BS, PR, and lies are stripped away, are creating something that isn't artistic or isn't intended to be artistic? Essentially, should people be allowed to do socially harming things under the "guise" of performing "art"? Because free speech is great and all, but remember, we still can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater. Public and social well-being is still a valid reason to restrict free speech.