The Day of the Geechee

"You know the damage one ignorant Negro can do?" - Sgt. Vernon Waters (A Soldier's Story)

Every now and then it just can't be avoided.

It happened to me when I was in undergrad. One afternoon, a quartet of us made a donut run to a local Minneapolis pastry shop. Our little syndicate consisted of three black dudes and a cool ass white guy named Dave. While we were ordering, to the amusement of the white patrons, and to the mortification of Dave and me, my two black buddies started a heated argument about which of them had the biggest lips.

It happened to me shortly after I began working. One day, while I was on my lunch break, back when I was unfortunate enough to be living in Milwaukee, I was walking to a Chinese restaurant with a diverse group of coworkers. Along came Troy, a good brother who I knew from a previous job, who spotted me and shouted (at the TOP of his lungs) "MY NIGGA!!!"

It happened to me again this morning. I was getting suggestions from some of the women in my office about Christmas gifts to buy the spouse when a sister (a real country gal and the only other black person in the department) chimes in with, "Well, you might have to niggerate her a gift and make it yourself. You know what I mean? Niggerate?"

I'm sorry to put it this way but if you're black, you will occasionally have to endure another black person coming along and just flat out embarrassing the shit out of you. There's just no circumventing it. I'm not referring to the occasional mangled syntax or inappropriate application of slang either. I'm talking about the kind of migraine-inducing buffoonery that will make you question whether or not the Civil Rights era really occurred and for what, if anything, tens of thousands of freedom fighters gave their lives.

In my experience, these cringe-worthy guffaws are usually committed by those lost, unconscious souls who my wife simply refers to as "The Element." Yes, indeed. Each one of us knows who she means. Those brothers and sisters who talk and laugh the loudest, curse and fight the oftenest, and are the first to be interviewed by your local news station. We all recognize them when we see them. Those hairstyles. Those clothes. The names that they give their children.

The reaction of the black middle class to the actions of the Element is, perhaps, best summed up by the antagonist of one of my favorite movies, A Soldier's Story. Sergeant Vernon Waters who, for my money, is one of the most fascinating and conflicted characters in the history of American cinema, has decided to focus his efforts on culling from his ranks black officers that he finds intolerable. His venomous outlook is perhaps best summed up when he speaks to CJ, one of his victims. "See, the Black race can't afford you no more. There used to be a time, we'd see someone like you singin', clownin', yassuh-bossin'... and we wouldn't do anything. Folks liked that. You were good. Homey kind of nigger. When they needed somebody to mistreat, call a name or two, they paraded you. Reminded them of the good old days. Not no more. The day of the Geechee is gone, boy. And you're going with it."

Sergeant Waters, who represents the so-called New Negro - black folks who through sweat and effort negotiated their way into the middle class - is convinced that the Element must be wiped from the face of the Earth. He believes this because he views their existence as a discomfiture and a threat to his upwardly mobile ambitions. Moreover, he is fixated on the possibility that (God Forbid!) the white man for whom he works will lump him in with the Element. White folks often have difficulty distinguishing between hardworking black folks like himself and ne'er-do-wells like CJ. This won't do. So, instead of attacking the real enemy, the oppressive agent that has historically ground him and his people into dust, he attacks those who languish at the bottom of the pile.

Which brings me to my point. Like it or not, every time we bristle at the regrettable exploits of poorer and/or less educated blacks than ourselves, we side with the Sergeant. If we're embarrassed by the ill-considered actions and words of certain members of the black underclass then perhaps we're the ones with the problem. Perhaps the next time I find myself wincing when another black person opens his or her mouth, I'll step back and take a good hard look at myself.

Nigger Doesn't Live Here Anymore

This nig..um African-American might as well start looking for a new job right now.



Apparently, not even black people can use the "N-word" anymore.

That's what Eddie "Undercover Brother" Griffin found out during a performance at a Black Enterprise Magazine sponsored event in Doral, Florida last week. Griffin, who's built his career on embracing and fleshing out embarrassing racial stereotypes, was pulled off of the stage after repeatedly dropping the N-bomb in front of a crowd presumably comprised predominately of middle and upper middle class black folks. This episode comes fresh on the heels of the NAACP holding a mock funeral for the word. I guess Eddie didn't get the memo.

Wow. OK. My first reaction to this news was wishing I could have been there to see the look on Eddie Griffin's face. PRICELESS, I'm sure. He's probably still wondering what he did wrong. 'What kind of topsy-turvy world am I inhabiting,' he must be saying to himself, 'when I can't repeatedly refer to my fellows as n-words?' My second reaction was wondering what the hell the organizers of the event were expecting. I mean, they booked him right? I can't imagine him just happening to be there, milling around in the crowd, and deciding to jump on stage and nigger it up, for lack of a better description. Hadn't they seen any of his stand up? Did they find him in the yellow pages? Were they expecting him to pull out a sledgehammer and start smashing watermelons? Honestly, I almost feel sorry for Eddie Griffin. For going on two decades he's been allowed, no encouraged (rewarded with money, fame, movie roles, etc.) for doggedly sticking to his routine. He's never bothered evaluating himself about his usage of the word, or any of his other coonery, because, for one, he hasn't had to and for two, he's not a top-tier comedian.

All of the great stand-up geniuses, at one time or another, come to a point at which they question their own integrity. The dearly departed Richard Pryor, in whose godly image current black comedians have unsuccessfully attempted to mold themselves, went to Africa at the height of his popularity, came back home, publicly retired the word from his vocabulary, and said simply "I didn't see any niggers in Africa." Chris Rock, whose penetrating, Bring The Pain routine, "Black Folks versus Niggers," regenerated his career in the mid-'90s, decided that he would no longer perform it because he feared it was being misinterpreted. Most recently, Dave Chappelle, the man whom Pryor said reminded him most of himself, completely abandoned his show once he began feeling that some (himself included) were confusing his art with minstrelsy. Ironically, in Griffin's best work, DysFunktional Family, he pays homage to Pryor and refers to him as the greatest comic of all time. Yet, apparently, although Griffin was heavily influenced by his idol, he and other black comics of his generation failed to pick up on one of Richard Pryor's most important lessons.

One More Thing: In this Post-Nigger World of mock funerals, bum-rushed comics and almost daily Al Sharpton grandstanding, I can't help but wonder if we're fighting the wrong battle. I know, of course, the power of hate words. They are, as Saul Williams articulated "shards of metal DROPPED from eight story windows." But I'm still left cold by this suddenly amped up movement to cull the word from our collective vocabulary and cast it down the memory hole. Perhaps it's because it seems to be yet another way for the black middle/upper middle class - who're at the heart of this campaign - to police the actions of the people beneath them. Maybe it's the dull realization that eliminating the n-word won't put the kibbosh on white people's usage of it. Or maybe it's because, as Breez (she's brilliant, check her out) puts it, "Zero tolerance almost always equates to zero Negro tolerance." Just ask Eddie Griffin.

Vick Kills Dogs, DL Sticks it to Sisters

Is this the new face of Free Speech?


A number of people have been asking me to use the blog to respond to a myriad of current events. Usually, I can sidestep these requests with skill and ease. However, there are two pop issues that I probably should address.

Here goes...

1) I don't really like dogs. I once owned a mixed breed (I grew up using the term "mutt" but, apparently, dogs deserve as much respect, with regard to how they're labeled, as humans) named Tank, who, somewhat ironically, was run over by a Ford Fairmont station wagon. Ever since, it's been difficult for me to bond emotionally with canines. Don't get me wrong. I don't hate them. I merely believe that they occupy far too much real estate in the American consciousness. It's as if Americans, weaned on the legend of Old Yeller and television reruns of Lassie, assume that there is a direct correlation between their patriotism and the number of times they've allowed Max to climb up on their beds and kiss them in the mouths. And when dog owners invariably compare their living property with children....don't even get me started on that.

Having made my bias crystal clear, I have to admit that I don't exactly hate Michael Vick. Am I an apologist for him? Absolutely not. The crimes for which he'll be entering a plea are both morally repulsive and prosecution-worthy. But I, like many others, have certainly noticed the, let's say complexion of the disdain for Vick and it makes me uncomfortable. It also raises another issue. I don't think many white Americans, particularly sports enthusiasts, have ever felt loose and easy with Number 7. Michael Vick's style of play - decidedly athletic and freewheeling and, let's face it, BLACK - has engendered a reaction from some whites that ranges from curiosity to outright contempt. This isn't a non-issue. I believe that if a traditional quarterback like Peyton Manning or Tom Brady had committed these atrocities, the public call for blood would be noticeably more muted. For Joe Sixpack, Vick's more significant crime might be not learning to stay his ass in the pocket. As always though, I could be wrong.

2) I think that the outrage borne out of DL Hughley's comments is deserved and righteous. After having read a combative and pointedly unremorseful interview with him, I'm even more disappointed. Let's keep in mind that Hughley chose to dog these women on the most popular late night television in the country, and did so in front of a predominately white audience. This ain't the Chitlin' Circuit to which he's accustomed. Furthermore, Hughley's "truth" - that these women are "some of the ugliest women I've ever seen" - is completely subjective and undoubtedly colored by white, racist standards of beauty. Also, his statements were fresh on the heels of the Imus debacle. Haven't these women had to endure enough public ridicule? AND, despite his poorly thought out intentions, the shit that he said wasn't even funny.

Before you Free Speech absolutists start foaming at the mouth, I'd argue that this isn't a free speech issue. No sensible person makes a Free Speech Mountain out of a Faux Pas molehill. Did DL Hughley have the right to say what he said? Damn tootin'. Should his social responsibility as a black man living in a historically and presently racist country outweigh his desire to sneak one in at the expense of black women in general and the Rutger's Women's Basketball team in particular? Hell yes.

Stop Snitching: 60 Minutes’ Assassination of Hip Hop Culture

Hip Hop in the Crosshairs

“This is what I mean an anti-nigger machine!” -Chuck D. (Public Enemy)

OK. I’ve finally been moved to respond to the “Stop Snitching” segment that appeared on 60 minutes recently. I was avoiding it until now because this would make the third post in a row that I’ve had to defend hip-hop to one degree or another. But, after five full days, the story continues to stick in my craw.

If you saw the segment, you might be moved to believe that an entire generation of young, black inner-city inhabitants is being led down the path of self-destruction, Pied piper-style, by rappers like Busta Rhymes and Cam’ron. Apparently, the programmers at 60 Minutes would like you to buy into the idea that fans of hip hop are being encouraged to not cooperate with the police if they witness a crime being committed. Regarding this particular illusion, allow me to employ a recently resurrected reference to the infamous 1978 mass murder/suicide in Jonestown, Guyana: “Don’t drink the Kool-Aid.” I won’t bore you with detailing the numerous problems with the piece. I would, however, like to make a few quick points.

“Justice,” as it were, is metered out quite differently on rough the urban streets of this country than it is in the state-sponsored criminal justice system. Quite a few of the young men who refuse to cooperate with police with regard to crimes like assault and homicide, even if they or their loved ones have been victimized, do so because they intend to directly exact revenge. Actually, I’m surprised that media darling Anderson Cooper didn’t take this salacious little detail into account. Imagine what kind of legs this story would have had if he’d introduced the idea that vigilantism is the law of the land in the ghettoes of the US.

Of all the cultural observers, sociologists, community advocates or thoughtful MCs 60 Minutes could have interviewed about this “phenomenon” they chose Cam’ron. Consider that for a moment. They chose Cam’ron, an inventor of ridiculous self-celebratory nursery rhymes, to explain the somewhat complicated issue of black distrust of the law enforcement machine. Next week I’m fully expecting to turn on 60 minutes and see an interview with Lil’ Kim about her thoughts on the disintegration of the black family.

Black folks and other minorities have been taught, by experience, to be wary of police. How much investigative journalism would it have taken to uncover this elusive detail? This should have been the predominant issue of the segment but it wasn’t even given a cursory examination.

Thankfully, I have access to a brother in the know, Dr. Lorenzo Boyd, a criminal justice professor at the University of Texas and an expert on community policing. He was gracious enough to arm me with a number of important facts regarding the relationship between those who police the nation’s inner cities and those who live in them. Here’s a few:

1. Although Blacks comprise roughly 14% of America’s population, Blacks constitute over 60% of all police arrests.
2. Race is one of the strongest predictors of attitudes towards the police
3. Black citizens in general tend to have less confidence in the police than Whites and are often skeptical of the police’s willingness or ability to protect them
4. In a 1998 Department of Justice Report, 67% of White respondents reported that they felt that the police treated all races fairly, while only 30% of Blacks felt that way
5. Public opinion polls have shown that overall Blacks tend to have a more negative view of the police than Whites, and Whites were more likely to support the use of deadly force by police than were Blacks.
6. Police brutality is a major source of dissatisfaction with police among both urban residents and racial minorities
7. Fatal shootings by police are more frequent in areas that have a large number of racial or economic underclass.
8. The 1992 St. Clair Commission report (examining Boston's police department) showed that race still plays a central role in the use of excessive force. The report found that during the period studied, 50 percent of complainants in the sample group were Black, while 26 percent of Boston's population was Black.
9. The Christopher Commission: “Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) officers frequently treat minorities differently from Whites, more often using disrespectful and abusive language, employing unnecessarily intrusive practices such as the `prone-out,' and engaging in use of excessive force when dealing with minorities" (1991).
10. According to the 1991 Christopher Commission Report on the Los Angeles Police Department, racial bias within the LAPD is not confined to the officer’s treatment of minority citizens, but it is also reflected in the conduct of officers towards their minority colleagues.
11. Minority officers are still too often subjected to racial slurs, discrimination within the police department. More than 80% of the minority officers in the Los Angeles Police Department are concentrated in “entry-level police officer ranks.”
12. The Christopher Commission cites a survey of which 650 officers responded. It states that approximately one-quarter of the officers responding agreed that “racial bias” (prejudice) on the part of officers towards minority citizens contributes to negative relations with the public (Christopher 1991).
13. The police are more likely to use full law enforcement authority (i.e., arrest) in communities that have higher percentages of minorities (Jackson and Boyd 2005).
14. African Americans 3x more likely than whites to experience threatened or actual force and are Hispanics more likely than whites, but less likely than African Americans, to experience either.
15. Police seen as unresponsive to complaints against them.
16. Racial & ethnic minorities often accuse police of failing to investigate, “covering up.”
17. Most people who believe they are a victim of police misconduct do not report it.

Lest you accuse me of being a complete pessimist, I end this with a glimmer of hope. I hope that maybe, one day, the powers that be at 60 Minutes will decide that, instead of attempts at broad cultural character assassination, they’ll dig just a little deeper into the roots of issues having to deal with black America. But until then, I’ll light a candle for Ed Bradley, continue to curse the day that Andy Rooney was born and resign myself to watching America’s Funniest Home Videos.

Cristal Redux

“Money, Power and Respect! Well, one out of three ain’t bad.”

My best friend, John, and I have been having an argument about the meaning and impact of Jay-Z’s protest of Louis Roederer, in general, and the Cristal brand in particular. John supports Jay-Z’s efforts. I think it’s the most insignificant protest I’ve ever heard of. I decided to make a post of excerpts from our exchange because our debate has brought up a few more points that I want to make.

John: "The bottom line is that you are reading too much into it [my view of Jay-Z’s hypocrisy]."

ACT: See, I think the bottom line is that you AREN'T reading enough into it. The fact that Jay-Z actively supported and marketed for a company about which he knew nothing - for FREE – is bad enough. The fact that he was doing it to celebrate his status is even worse. The fact that he does this with (despite hip hop being consumed, in large part, by whites) urban black youth is inexcusable. Frankly, I think it's cause for celebration when something like this comes back to bite him, and others, in the ass.

John: "..saying that the average black man can't afford the stuff is pointless."

ACT: The point, my friend, is that this tacky, gluttonous, hyperconsumerized culture that Jay-Z revels in doesn't consider the wants and needs of those of us who live paycheck to paycheck. Therefore, why should we give a damn about him or his absurd "protest?"

John: "He [Jay-Z] took a stand purely based on the racist comments from the company's president."

ACT: We may just have to agree to disagree here. What you see as a stance I see merely as reactionary. If someone decides to boycott Walmart because they underpay their workers or force small area business to close, that's a stance. If someone boycotts Walmart because the Walton children say they don't want their business, that's just, as I've said before, plain common sense.

John: "Hip Hop is a MULTI-BILLION dollar industry and that economic power should be wielded."

ACT: I agree with you here. In this case, though, I don't really think it's being wielded at all. Wielding power means making impactful changes to a community, industry, group of people, system, etc. If this boycott leads to Louis Roederer establishing some sort of scholarship for urban youth or developing a diversity sensitivity program within the company I'll be the first one to applaud Jay-Z's efforts. As of yet, it hasn't even led to an apology.

John: "Just because you or I can't afford a bottle of Cristal doesn't me we shouldn't support him."

ACT: Aaaaah. See, this is, fundamentally, where you and I differ. This is how I see it. Jay-Z wanted people to think he's important and was desirous of flaunting his wealth so he bragged incessantly about what he could afford - implying, btw, that others could NOT afford it. He bragged about diamonds despite the fact that the diamond industry is a corrupt, murderous monopoly. He bragged about expensive cars and clothes despite the fact that much of his black listening audience can barely afford to eek out a living. He boasted, on every single record, of his history in the drug trade despite the fact that drug use has crippled the "black community" for decades ("Hov did that so hopefully you don't have to go through that" was just a stupid attempt to sound conscious). He continued the unfortunate trend of objectifying women, most of whom are black. Then, one of the companies that he's been celebrating - an alcohol manufacturer! - rejected people of his ilk and suddenly he's Jesse Jackson. I have a major problem with someone actively participating in their own exploitation, as well as that of others, and then turning around and looking for support when they realize they've been played for a fool.

John: "What are you talking about!? You are out of your mind if you don't think what black folks mean to Cristal isn't significant. Do you KNOW HOW MUCH money the Hip Hop industry and movement behind it brings to Cristal annually?!?"

ACT: Maybe I'm deluded. But I DO know that Louis Roederer hasn't been in business for 230 years on the strength of the black dollar. They'll be just fine without the hip hop crowd. Plus, I think one of the things that we have to consider is that Cristal had panache among its clientele long before rappers started buying it. It was considered the choice of the ELITE. That's why these rappers started drinking it. They didn't make the brand hot. They just jumped on the bandwagon. A bandwagon that whites own.

John: "Seriously. It is what it is. A very powerful black man using his influence to attack a company that doesn't support where he came from and his people. Period."

ACT: Money doesn't necessarily equal power. Purchasing power perhaps. But you can be rich and own clubs and market sneakers with your name on them and not be powerful. Power is the ability to get your way in society despite the objections of others. In that regard, the Bush/Cheney crew is powerful. The military is powerful. Microsoft is powerful. The tobacco companies are powerful. The NRA is powerful. Jay-Z is just a rich retired rapper whom those with real power don't even have to acknowledge.

ACT: One final thing: Have we considered that perhaps Frederic Rouzaud just might know what the hell he's doing? Maybe he realized that he might well have to choose between maintaining the loyalty of his wealthy white patronage and establishing the brand among the hip hop Nouveau Riche. Maybe whites who have enjoyed the brand amongst themselves for the last 230 years don't want to drink the same champagne as tasteless Negroes. Maybe Rouzaud was reacting to that when he was interviewed.

Cristal Bites The Hand That Foolishly Feeds It

Remember when we used to have meaningful protests?

Apparently, the makers of Cristal champagne don’t necessarily appreciate all that the hip hop community has done for the brand.

In the latest slap to the face of those who seek to exalt the consumption of expensive products over common sense and good taste, Frederic Rouzaud, managing director of Louis Roederer (the producers of Cristal champagne) has implied that he doesn’t court the patronage of the hip hop community. In an interview with The Economist magazine, he responds to a question about his products popularity with rappers by stating, "That's a good question but what can we do? We can't forbid people from buying it. I'm sure Dom Perignon or Krug would be delighted to have their business." I'm wagering that my man Lou thought he was pretty safe making these comments considering that they would appear in The Economist. I mean, The Economist ain't The Source.

Now, Jay-Z himself has descended from on high to launch a personal and professional protest against the brand. "It has come to my attention that the managing director of Cristal, Frederic Rouzaud views the 'hip-hop' culture as 'unwelcome attention,"' Jay-Z said in a statement released Wednesday. "I view his comments as racist and will no longer support any of his products through any of my various brands including The 40/40 Club nor in my personal life."

Really? Word? Is this the same Jay-Z who wrote such classics as “Ain’t No Nigga,” “Rap Game/Crack Game,” “Nigga What, Nigga Who,” “Big Pimpin’,” “Is That Yo Bitch?” “2 Many Hoes,” and, along with R Kelly, that lovely ode to female sexual anatomy, “Pussy”? Perhaps he should ask himself who he thinks has done more harm to black folks, Frederic Rouzard or he. After all, a whole hell of a lot more black people listen to Jay-Z than have ever consumed a bottle of Cristal.

Or maybe what Jay-Z and other rappers should be asking themselves is why they feel compelled to promote alcohol, overpriced vehicles, gunplay, black on black murder, violence against women, the selling of drugs, blood diamonds and a whole litany of silly, destructive shit in the first place. As much as we love Biggie, Jay-Z, Tupac, Nas, or the legion of up and coming Dirty South MCs, we have to admit that they’ve poisoned countless young, black minds with their gleeful endorsement of death, violence, sex and excess. How many videos do we have to endure that feature black women shaking their asses, cats throwing yellow diamonds and jewelry (by Jacob!) at the camera and dudes spilling Cristal on women’s chests as they speed down the rode in Lamborghinis?

As I’ve written before, I LOVE it when these conservatives and corporations let folks know how they feel about them. In this case, the worst possible scenario I can imagine is that these primitive capitalists, who are well compensated for embarrassing and exploiting our people, but generally not compensated at ALL for name-dropping Mercedes Benz, get their feelings hurt.

My guess is that Rouzard’s comments and Jay-Z’s little protest won’t have much of an impact on rappers who seem to need to rub their supposed status in our faces. I just can’t see flipping on the increasingly shitty BET and watching hip hop videos in which dudes throw their “Father of the Year” trophies or college degrees at the screen.

Heaven, I Need Some Prison Time

“Why am I not in jail?”


I’ve got a few questions.

Why is R. Kelly still walking free? I’m not going to give this topic a whole lot of Blaxplanation space but I was just wondering about that. How many already-famous people can make a pornographic video containing themselves and an underage girl, have that video be bootlegged and widely distributed, and still remain remarkably unconvicted? And why don’t black folks seem to care?

I realize that we’re an exceptionally forgiving people – particularly with one another. Marion Barry was re-elected AFTER he smoked crack on tape. Ray Nagin was recently re-elected after he failed the city of New Orleans during its greatest time of need. The “Reverend” Jesse Jackson’s “Love Child” debacle doesn’t appear to have hurt him. I just can’t understand the amazing amount of tolerance that we’re showing a full-fledged sexual predator. Can Stepping in the Name of Love really serve as such a distraction that we’re giving this cat a free pass?

A few years ago, when the R. Kelly sex vid first emerged, I was talking to a sister who absolutely LOVES him. Interestingly, she wasn’t at all put off by the tape (she had seen it). Her argument was that these “young girls” know exactly what they’re doing when they chase after a celebrity. In her opinion, it was a victimless crime.

I mean, I LOVE Prince. He’s a visionary, a musical genius, etc. But if there was a video tape circulating around the country with him (forgive me) peeing on the face of a minor, I would have to abandon him. At the very least, I would expect him to have the humility to not follow up his shameful act with an album called, “The Chocolate Factory”. Sorry, but I can’t listen to a disc, no matter how well made, with R. Kelly exploring his sexuality anymore.