USA Politics (redux)

[Madiel]

Well then you should know better than to comment on and judge an article before actually reading it.

I did not comment on the article. You really don't seem to have registered that.

I commented on the quote. The quote you selected. And my comment has absolutely nothing to do with "knowledge" anyway, it has to do with the obvious logical problems of trying to move from a narrative about a single jerk rapping on the subway to a generalisation about an entire musical genre through to an even bigger statement about what ails African-Americans.

My job in fact involves an awful lot of logic and analysis. Which is pretty much why I can drive a truck through gaping logical holes. I might well find things in "the article" that I agree with or find worthy of consideration, but your insistence that I've somehow managed to comment on an article that I've never seen is a really really bad piece of logic. You know damn well what I commented on. Stop suggesting that I performed the miraculous feat of commenting on material other than the material that you provided, and stop assuming that my comment had anything to do with the material that you didn't provide. I never claimed I was commenting on the article, it's you who keeps saying that over and over despite it being incredibly obvious that it isn't true.

[SimonNZ]

Yeah, in part. Are you "well-informed"? I don't sense that sort of "venom" in Duke Ellington or Motown. What you're essentially saying is that to be "really black and free" requires generous doses of venom and hostility.

I'm not saying anything of the sort. I'm saying that any black musician in the pre Civil rights era who wanted to express their real outrage at racism in their music had no possibility of doing so. McWhorter seems to think that because it's not found in the music that that somehow shows that outrage wasn't felt by the musicians.

[fbjim]

John McWhorter is smarter than me and you, that's for sure. Is he right about this issue? I've no idea

He isn't.

[milk]

In linguistics. There's been a whole other thread where someone else has been telling me that you have to have the right kind of qualifications, whereas apparently here just having qualifications is enough.

I've got some qualifications. I actually have qualifications in three different fields of study. None of which are relevant to the issue at hand particularly, but hey, I do have some qualifications.

John Hamilton McWhorter V (/məkˈhwɔːrtər/;[1] born October 6, 1965) is an American linguist with a specialty in creole languages, sociolects, and Black English. He is currently associate professor of linguistics at Columbia University,[2] where he also teaches American studies and music history.[3][4] He is the author of books on race relations, hip-hop and African-American culture.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McWhorter

[DizzyD]

I did not comment on the article. You really don't seem to have registered that.

I commented on the quote. The quote you selected. And my comment has absolutely nothing to do with "knowledge" anyway, it has to do with the obvious logical problems of trying to move from a narrative about a single jerk rapping on the subway to a generalisation about an entire musical genre through to an even bigger statement about what ails African-Americans.

My job in fact involves an awful lot of logic and analysis. Which is pretty much why I can drive a truck through gaping logical holes. I might well find things in "the article" that I agree with or find worthy of consideration, but your insistence that I've somehow managed to comment on an article that I've never seen is a really really bad piece of logic. You know damn well what I commented on. Stop suggesting that I performed the miraculous feat of commenting on material other than the material that you provided...

I provided a link also to the rest of the article, and you couldn't even get the guy's racial group right. You didn't use your awesome skills of logic to dissect anything in the couple of paragraphs or the article as whole beyond your mistaken perception of a white guy being upset over a black guy rapping in a KFC and subway car.

Here's another McWhorter article to mull over, which seems pretty logically sound to me, even this isolated paragraph. But please take the trouble to read the whole thing before jumping in head first:

"First, it's time for well-intentioned whites to stop pardoning as 'understandable' the worst of human nature whenever black people exhibit it. The person one pities is a person one may like but does not truly respect. Certainly whites must keep extirpating vestiges of racism, even within their own souls. But for David Howard to concur with his firing by Washington mayor Anthony Williams for using the word 'niggardly' is condescension, not compassion; for Nathan Glazer to reverse his longstanding opposition to affirmative action because whites 'owe' black people is to cast blacks as characters in a morality play, not to usher living human beings out of a historically conditioned wariness of school."

https://www.city-journal.org/html/what%E2%80%99s-holding-blacks-back-12025.html

[Madiel]

John Hamilton McWhorter V (/məkˈhwɔːrtər/;[1] born October 6, 1965) is an American linguist with a specialty in creole languages, sociolects, and Black English. He is currently associate professor of linguistics at Columbia University,[2] where he also teaches American studies and music history.[3][4] He is the author of books on race relations, hip-hop and African-American culture.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McWhorter

That doesn't tell me what his qualifications in hip-hop are, apart from apparently hating it.

Seriously, I've just had another thread where someone repeatedly intimated that Hurwitz is not qualified to have a meaningful opinion on musicology despite being a qualified historian as well as a professional music reviewer. So I would prefer to know what his actual qualifications are related to American studies, music history, race relations and so on, rather than just being told that he talks about them a lot.

[fbjim]

John Hamilton McWhorter V is entitled to say whatever idiotic things he wants about hip-hop and how angry he was at a rapper on the subway - his qualifications do not constitute an argument.


And frankly anyone who listens to someone with a roman numeral at the end of their name on the topic of hip-hop has something coming.

[Todd]

From the Gray Lady: The Rise of the Far-Right Latina

This is what happens when the right type of person with the wrong types of views wins an election.  A Mexican-born citizen who wins office apparently cannot be labeled conservative, she (and they) must be labeled "far-right".  I wonder if she or the other fearsome "far-right" Latinas cited in the most august of news sources will make common cause with white nationalists.  The continued, inadvertent dilution of a once potent political phrase will be helpful, though.

[milk]

I'm not saying anything of the sort. I'm saying that any black musician in the pre Civil rights era who wanted to express their real outrage at racism in their music had no possibility of doing so. McWhorter seems to think that because it's not found in the music that that somehow shows that outrage wasn't felt by the musicians.

You think McWhorter is saying that black people weren't outraged at racism before the 60s? I really think you are not understanding the words. Or, more likely, you're trying to find a meaning in them, perhaps unconsciously, that you can can stomp your foot on. I assure you, John McWhorter knows better than you, far better, that black people were outraged by racism. He's talking about something specific, a kind of militancy. He may be right or wrong but he's not saying what you say he's saying. This is the second time you've written in your own straw man. I just think you're being silly.   

He isn't.

You shouldn't have

[DizzyD]

From the Gray Lady: The Rise of the Far-Right Latina

This is what happens when the right type of person with the wrong types of views wins an election.  A Mexican-born citizen who wins office apparently cannot be labeled conservative, she (and they) must be labeled "far-right".  I wonder if she or the other fearsome "far-right" Latinas cited in the most august of news sources will make common cause with white nationalists.  The continued, inadvertent dilution of a once potent political phrase will be helpful, though.

I wonder why no one is ever described in the media as "far left" or really any kind of "left".

That doesn't tell me what his qualifications in hip-hop are, apart from apparently hating it.

Seriously, I've just had another thread where someone repeatedly intimated that Hurwitz is not qualified to have a meaningful opinion on musicology despite being a qualified historian as well as a professional music reviewer. So I would prefer to know what his actual qualifications are related to American studies, music history, race relations and so on, rather than just being told that he talks about them a lot.

I didn't say anything about Hurwitz' qualifications. I said being an expert in modern European history doesn't in itself make you a musicologist. Actually I think Hurwitz' musical background qualifies him to speak on musicological subjects. Sometimes I agree with him, sometimes I don't. He has some interesting takes.

[milk]

John Hamilton McWhorter V is entitled to say whatever idiotic things he wants about hip-hop and how angry he was at a rapper on the subway - his qualifications do not constitute an argument.


And frankly anyone who listens to someone with a roman numeral at the end of their name on the topic of hip-hop has something coming.

Now there's an argument! You go girl!

[Madiel]

I provided a link also to the rest of the article, and you couldn't even get the guy's racial group right. You didn't use your awesome skills of logic to dissect anything in the couple of paragraphs or the article as whole beyond your mistaken perception of a white guy being upset over a black guy rapping in a KFC and subway car.

Explain how his race has anything to do with it, or protects him from logical problems. Explain how a black guy being upset over a single rapper, who clearly isn't a particularly popular rapper, is any different. Explain how the race of the observer was relevant to anything that I said.

Actually, don't. This is utterly tiresome. The whole notion that a black guy must be right is a fallacy (not least because not all black guys agree with each other on this stuff, which is pretty much why McWhorter has an audience for this stuff). You literally refuse to tell me what the point of the story about the black rapper is, even though you're the one who chose to select that part. You reject any claim that McWhorter is trying to use the rapper to symbolise something more general, when that is the only thing that makes telling the story of the black rapper have any fucking point whatsoever.

That's literally as far as we got. You keep demanding that I read an article, for what? What is going to be achieved by reading lots more paragraphs and telling you what I think about them when you can't even cope with really basic points about the handful paragraphs that you personally selected for display? It's going to be such a colossal fucking waste of time. Seriously. Sure, I can spend a little bit of time reading the article, and might well do so, but engaging in discussion with you about it, here? Absolute fucking waste of time. Even with prompting, you cannot indicate what YOU think the point is of the material that YOU selected as a highlight of the article. You just know that you like the conclusion of the article and we're all just supposed to shut up as a result.

It's no wonder that here on a classical forum we can find people who like an argument that is based on certain kinds of music being bad music. But that doesn't make it a good argument, any more than any of the other "pop music is bad" arguments I've seen on this forum over the years. The fact that this time around it's specifically 'black' pop music that's bad doesn't make it a better argument, and your willing offer to throw various kinds of 'white' pop music under the bus if it would help was just downright embarrassing.

McWhorter acknowledges an alternative view of the value of hip-hop just so that he can reject it. And so what? Because he has a negative view of it, and you don't like it, he's right, and the black scholars who argue for the value of it are wrong? Oh, okay then.

An argument based on artistic taste is just pathetic.

[DizzyD]

I'm not saying anything of the sort. I'm saying that any black musician in the pre Civil rights era who wanted to express their real outrage at racism in their music had no possibility of doing so. McWhorter seems to think that because it's not found in the music that that somehow shows that outrage wasn't felt by the musicians.

That is what you're saying. Showing "outrage" or "venom" is an indication of black artistic freedom, and the reason we didn't see it in Scott Joplin or Dizzy Gillespie is because they were constrained by whites. A really irritating thing to me is constantly considering black people almost exclusively in terms of their relations with whites.

[fbjim]

To be blunt it reminds me of the "rap is just b*tches and bling" statements which more or less just betray either a lack of knowledge of any music since about 2002, or bad taste. Hip-hop is, like rock music, ideologically diverse, and has changed significantly over time. There's no "hip-hop monoculture" which happens to be defined by 90s gangsta rap.

[SimonNZ]

You think McWhorter is saying that black people weren't outraged at racism before the 60s? I really think you are not understanding the words. Or, more likely, you're trying to find a meaning in them, perhaps unconsciously, that you can can stomp your foot on. I assure you, John McWhorter knows better than you, far better, that black people were outraged by racism. He's talking about something specific, a kind of militancy. He may be right or wrong but he's not saying what you say he's saying. This is the second time you've written in your own straw man. I just think you're being silly.   

You shouldn't have

If I'm misreading him it's due to a lack of clarity and suggestions in his own writing,. And I don't see how that in any way qualifies as creating a "strawman".

[DizzyD]

You reject any claim that McWhorter is trying to use the rapper to symbolise something more general,

I didn't say that. I said he's not saying that, as you put it, a guy rapping on a subway car is "emblematic of black culture". Now I'm not going to play these little semantic games to aid you in saving face.

[SimonNZ]

I wonder why no one is ever described in the media as "far left" or really any kind of "left".

Lol. I see McWhorter Atlantic articles are heavily peppered with unironic use of the words "woke left".

[fbjim]

Lol. I see McWhorter Atlantic articles are heavily peppered with unironic use of the words "woke left".

Talking about the various foibles of whatever "the left" is has always been a pastime of center-liberal publications like the NYT and The Atlantic - if the "actual" far-left are mentioned less often it is because they are not relevant in national politics. The Democratic party leadership is still defined by 70-and-80 year olds expressing liberal ideology from the Clinton era - the equivilent of what happened to the Republican party is if a fringe left-wing group like the Lyndon Larouche people took over the national party apparatus a la Trump.

Most of the "left-wing" people who have any involvement in national politics would be at home in social-democratic or European-style Green parties.

[milk]

Explain how his race has anything to do with it, or protects him from logical problems. Explain how a black guy being upset over a single rapper, who clearly isn't a particularly popular rapper, is any different. Explain how the race of the observer was relevant to anything that I said.

Actually, don't. This is utterly tiresome. The whole notion that a black guy must be right is a fallacy (not least because not all black guys agree with each other on this stuff, which is pretty much why McWhorter has an audience for this stuff). You literally refuse to tell me what the point of the story about the black rapper is, even though you're the one who chose to select that part. You reject any claim that McWhorter is trying to use the rapper to symbolise something more general, when that is the only thing that makes telling the story of the black rapper have any fucking point whatsoever.

That's literally as far as we got. You keep demanding that I read an article, for what? What is going to be achieved by reading lots more paragraphs and telling you what I think about them when you can't even cope with really basic points about the handful paragraphs that you personally selected for display? It's going to be such a colossal fucking waste of time. Seriously. Sure, I can spend a little bit of time reading the article, and might well do so, but engaging in discussion with you about it, here? Absolute fucking waste of time. Even with prompting, you cannot indicate what YOU think the point is of the material that YOU selected as a highlight of the article. You just know that you like the conclusion of the article and we're all just supposed to shut up as a result.

It's no wonder that here on a classical forum we can find people who like an argument that is based on certain kinds of music being bad music. But that doesn't make it a good argument, any more than any of the other "pop music is bad" arguments I've seen on this forum over the years. The fact that this time around it's specifically 'black' pop music that's bad doesn't make it a better argument, and your willing offer to throw various kinds of 'white' pop music under the bus if it would help was just downright embarrassing.

McWhorter acknowledges an alternative view of the value of hip-hop just so that he can reject it. And so what? Because he has a negative view of it, and you don't like it, he's right, and the black scholars who argue for the value of it are wrong? Oh, okay then.

An argument based on artistic taste is just pathetic.

I actually feel a little regret here. You're tone is so angry and dismissive but I'm not blameless. This is totally unproductive. I think the original topic that got this going is worth discussing: race and crime in the U.S., in the context of U.S. politics. These back and forth-s start to sink to where everyone's looking for balls of dirt to throw and nothing more. There's another way to go about this where the stakes aren't who wins this round. I really do think it's possible to discuss these issues without so much drama. Personally, I don't assume I'm right about everything and I think it's a good idea to spend at least some time exploring why people believe what they believe and what would make them change their minds.

[milk]

If I'm misreading him it's due to a lack of clarity and suggestions in his own writing,. And I don't see how that in any way qualifies as creating a "strawman".

Well, I see you believe very strongly that this is the case. Is there a chance that you might feel differently upon rereading it another time? Do you feel there's anything at stake here, ego-wise? You see I sense that there's more to this and that admitting there might be some nuance here would be slightly humiliating. Of course, you could throw the same charge at me. That's OK, I can take it. I just don't see McWhorter saying black people weren't outraged about racism before the 60s. Not in the piece or anywhere else. I think it's absurd.

To be blunt it reminds me of the "rap is just b*tches and bling" statements which more or less just betray either a lack of knowledge of any music since about 2002, or bad taste. Hip-hop is, like rock music, ideologically diverse, and has changed significantly over time. There's no "hip-hop monoculture" which happens to be defined by 90s gangsta rap.

There are all sorts of ways you can dismiss him by misreading what he's saying. It's a trick. "...it reminds me of..." "Hey John, you mean all rap music is about guns and rape?" "Why yes I do lovey..." BTW you reminded me of De La Soul, the one Hip Hop album I owned way back. Kind of stoner hip hop. I think my problem with Hip Hop is that it's so nerdy. It's all about the ins and outs of technology. Music for Djs and headphones and beats. It's not just hip hop that's like that of course. I think around the 80s, all popular music started sliding slowly away from that human touch. But I digress...