N vs BP
In the latest battle in the war between Niggers vs. Black People, screenwriter/novelist/badass John Ridley gives us The Manifesto for the Ascendancy for the Modern Nigger:
"Let me tell you something about niggers, the oppressed minority within our minority. Always down. Always out. Always complaining that they can't catch a break. Notoriously poor about doing for themselves. Constantly in need of a leader but unable to follow in any direction that's navigated by hard work, self-reliance. And though they spliff and drink and procreate their way onto welfare doles and WIC lines, niggers will tell you their state of being is no fault of their own. They are not responsible for their nearly 5 percent incarceration rate and their 9.2 percent unemployment rate. Not responsible for the 11.8 percent rate at which they drop out of high school. For the 69.3 percent of births they create out of wedlock."
The piece goes on to contrast Condi and Powell's envoy to China (a great moment in black history) with the recent Cleveland rioting (a typical moment in niggerdom).
Now, I'm no fan of Condi. For me, her shoe shopping trip during Katrina says it all (perhaps this is evidence that she, like Ridley, has decided to cut niggers loose as well). And I think both her and Powell's real primary roles in the Bush Administration have been to deflect racial criticism, much in the way Howard Stern uses Robin Quivers. Ishmael Reed called these kinds of people "Automated Robots."
That said, I think Ridley's piece makes excellent points about how we need to redefine ourselves in the African American community, and the importance of breaking away from the now archaic modes of the civil rights past.
Agree or disagree, I think this is the most important African American manifesto since Trey Ellis's New Black Aesthetic.
Read it for yourself, and if you get a chance, tell me what you think.
"Let me tell you something about niggers, the oppressed minority within our minority. Always down. Always out. Always complaining that they can't catch a break. Notoriously poor about doing for themselves. Constantly in need of a leader but unable to follow in any direction that's navigated by hard work, self-reliance. And though they spliff and drink and procreate their way onto welfare doles and WIC lines, niggers will tell you their state of being is no fault of their own. They are not responsible for their nearly 5 percent incarceration rate and their 9.2 percent unemployment rate. Not responsible for the 11.8 percent rate at which they drop out of high school. For the 69.3 percent of births they create out of wedlock."
The piece goes on to contrast Condi and Powell's envoy to China (a great moment in black history) with the recent Cleveland rioting (a typical moment in niggerdom).
Now, I'm no fan of Condi. For me, her shoe shopping trip during Katrina says it all (perhaps this is evidence that she, like Ridley, has decided to cut niggers loose as well). And I think both her and Powell's real primary roles in the Bush Administration have been to deflect racial criticism, much in the way Howard Stern uses Robin Quivers. Ishmael Reed called these kinds of people "Automated Robots."
That said, I think Ridley's piece makes excellent points about how we need to redefine ourselves in the African American community, and the importance of breaking away from the now archaic modes of the civil rights past.
Agree or disagree, I think this is the most important African American manifesto since Trey Ellis's New Black Aesthetic.
Read it for yourself, and if you get a chance, tell me what you think.
19 Comments:
i just started reading this blog a few days ago, it was recommended by someone involved in the hurston/wright foundation and i gotta admit that the blog on why the legacy awards is needed was poignant and seemed to agree with conversations i'd had with my friends. that being said, i kept reading.
but the blog today, well the link to that black manifesto. it's straight bs. matter fact, its worse than bs cause dude has a specific agenda he's writing to (to give the most flattering praise to condelezza and colin that is possible without any acknowledgement of the historical criiticsm of the policies of both) while giving you an outlet for your anger, the whole nigger angle.
this quote says it all for me, or at least most of it:
That which retards us is the worst of "us," those who disdain actual ascendancy gained by way of intellectual expansion and physical toil—who instead value the posture of an "urban," a "street," a "real" existence, no matter that such a culture threatens to render them extinct.
I think he falls victim to what a lot of cats from the civil rights era fall victim to. Somehow they think they are no longer responsible for the children they raise, nor the school systems these young folks get to go to and not learn a thing. The graduation rates are appalling, but what is more appalling is that you can get to the 7th grade without the skills you should have gotten in the 3rd.
The real thing is that you get success and a forum today the same way you did 20 years ago or 30 years ago when baldwin criticized wright. You get a forum and soapbox by trying to cut down someone else. Here, we have the niggers made into some homogenous whole that can be defined by incarceration rates, wic profiles, and out of wedlock pregnancy. I almost cringe that this is the type of unnuanced description that we gonna say is included in a manifesto.
But the larger thing is that we listen to him, just as Baldwin was listened to as he cut down Wright, but we miss out on the nuanced critique offered by Ralph Ellison on the Wright aesthetic.
If there is a problem with rap music, with this so-called urban fixation with thug life and ignorance. It is rooted, are partly rooted (let me not make the lame generalizations that gotta accompany a manifesto, cause its a manifesto) in the abhorrence of the elements of culture that sustained the black community prior to the civil rights movement. Where are the grandparents of the movement today? Oh, they out shopping on black friday, getting the toys for Christmas. They still fat from celebrating the death of the indians and they haven't told a youngster bout the civil rights movement since eyes on the prize was on tv.
So the problem is that we refuse to talk to each other. Older generations leave us no legacy, but bestow a series of complaints.
And I end here.
dwayne
dwayne-
Thanks for your passionate response.
1. Ridley is not of the Civil Rights era. He's younger, and from the post-Civil Rights era. I don't think he has any children either. Did you mean in the general, metaphoric sense? Even still, again, he's more of a child of the Civil Rights generation himself.
2. I agree, Ridley puts the complete responisibility for the state of the lower end of black society onto black people, and thus ignores a host of historic social realities. That said, we can't change history, but we can change ourselves. I think what he is trying to point out is that complete abdication of responsibility is not only dishonest, it's extremely detrimental. And it's getting us nowhere.
3. I agree, on Condi and Powell, Ridley ignores the many faults of their tenure to emphasize his point about the historic moment. Another good point though, who should we be more ashamed of, these successful assimilators, or the minstrels who largely get a free critical pass from the black community?
4. I think you are referencing James Baldwin's essay on Richard's Wright's Native Son, entitled "Everybody's Protest Novel." This essay was written nearly 60 years ago, in 1949. This was not merely a hack's "cutting down" of an established writer, rather it was a brilliant, groundbreaking essay on the importance of moving past a 19th century race mentality and presenting instead fully realized and truly human black people in fiction. This was not simply about aggrandizement: Baldwin risked his entire career by speaking truth to power. It cost him his friendship with Wright. Also, Ralph Ellison's greatest critique of Native Son was Invisible Man, which was hardly ignored. Nor were his later essays in Shadow and Act. Excellent referrence though.
5. It's important to recognize that there is a difference between critiqueing and cutting down. For historic reasons, we have no culture of positive self-criticism in the African American community. That is now a huge part of our problem. Without criticism, there can be no evaluation of failure, no revelation of hypocrisy, and no improvement.
5. Baldwin went after Wright in the same way that Wright went after Hughes, in the same way that Hughes went after DuBois and Locke. It is in the nature of each generation to at first degrade the generations immediately before them (in much the way you do at the end of your response to these "grandparents" that you rail at). I did the same thing against the Black Arts Movement. With time, though, you become less self-righteous and see their strengths instead of just their weaknesses.
7. As a generation, the African American grandparents (and by this I think you refer to the Boomers and the era slightly before them) left us a tremendous legacy, culturally, historically and politically. It's out there to discovery. You will enjoy doing so.
Thanks again.
MJ
First off, Mat, many thanks for the heads regarding your entry and your take on the Ridley piece. I read the Manifesto several times and I think it is a masterful supposition. I'm sure you already know what I think as we read each others blogs regularly. At the end of the day, as I have espoused countless times at Afronerd, African Americans really DO deserve the respect of internal diversity. Whether this diversity entails culture, politics, philosophy, art....you choose...at this juncture, it is NECESSARY for survival. Essentially what Ridley has propogated is a revamped version of the Dubois talented tenth mantra, which I emphatically say.."hallelujah!" This predetermined societal "uni-mind"(not unlike Jack Kirby's fictional composite from the Eternals saga) mentality that people of color are forced to be comprised of is not only archaic but may prove to be our downfall. Just as White folk are allowed to have their social, cultural and political distinctions so should African Americans. I don't want to give the impression that I am being heartless but we are at the point where the Black underclass is positioned not to take ANY responsibility for dysfunctionalism that has reached critical mass. I may have to provide a "repeat broadcast" on this selfsame article Mat(of course giving you your propers)...Peace & I'm out!
dburt aka Afronerd
http://www.afronerd.com
mat,
yeah, i admit that i really hadn't thought out my first response like i should have. let me see if i can make amends a little.
knowing nothing about ridley, i can only speak to what i think he represents. and that is the voice that accuses my generation of abdicating a personal responsibility that largely we have not. and to say that we haven't abdicated responsiblity for our actions makes it seem as if the numbers are false, but the numbers are true. so what is going on in the black community?
i think you're right on our community lacking the element that honestly criticizes certain elements. and lacking that, many of us who may straddle some imaginary fence between niggerdom and the new negro fall into niggerdom, if you will. but more than that, these discussions end up leaving out the very real governmental and social issues that seem to be unique to black americans living in the united states. i put my name on this joint, so if anyone who knows me reads this they will end up confronting me over it, but the truth is before i started working in a so-called "inner city" middle school, i was all gung ho about finding ways to give what wasn't given to me. but now, man, it's depressing just walking in the building, and i wrestle with being there trying to impart whatever it is i have, but i know that the full time teachers carry this load of what can i do. and i think some of them resign themselves to showing up.
now this speaks nothing about the educators, authors, business folks etc who have given up on the niggers and decided that their income will continue to rise so that if niggers get to close they can move to some far out gated community. but like in butler's parable series, those gated communities only protect us for so long.
which leads me to my manifesto piece. i know we criticize the generation before us, and i was frontin on baldwin. but i do read the ellison essay as more to the problem of wright's native son. namely, that he gave us the portrait of bigger, but never did he really give us the portrait of how he, who was just as much bigger as anyone else, became who he was. and maybe it's an unfair charge to expect him to have done that, but that's what he was missing, i think. and that's what we are missing. we need not leave the mass of niggers to their mess.
we dole out praise and criticism with the same shaking spoon, making sure we siphon off any excess unless we fatten an ego or get accused of uncle tomming. so yes, that's an issue. but probably the larger issue is that we haven't dedicated ourselves wholeheartedly to acknowledging and attacking the problems within our community. i mean the civil rights movement, even bam, was focused on addressing an outside threat. do we ever address our own ability to endanger our own lives? i dont think ridley charges anyone to do that.
oh yeah point taken, there is a difference in criticizing and cutting down. i think baldwin and ellison criticized and ridley cut down. me, i know i cut down older generations. sometimes. bad habit i guess. we get ragged on hard most of the time, i walk in a church and get stereotyped. and i couldnt tell you my great grandmother's name. no knock on my grandma, just a fact of the cultural tradition that i have to dig for.
but digging is fun. thanks for the response. this can go on forever. just having you start the discussion makes me think on how i approach the problem, cause we all know it's a problem.
dwayne
dwayne-
No need to apologize for being passionate (as long as nobody got shot).
I think you have a good point: it seems as if Ridley is implying that the poor just be cut loose, metaphorically, in much the same way white America cuts loose their poor. I think he would argue that he is not talking about poor people, but rather people, rich and poor, with an impoverished, "niggerish" mentality.
I don't think he's going after a generation here, though. He criticizes a 15-year-old thug, but he also goes after Sharpton and Jessie too. He's just criticizing black pop culture as a whole.
I agree, we do have a set of issues we have to face that are unique to the black community. I don't think anyone in this debate would deny that. What I think Ridley is saying, as well as others, is that as a group we have to overcome those special hurdles instead of using them as excuses for not running the race.
I feel for you on the community tip. I was out there too, and then became similarly burnt out. Now I try to change the world with words instead.
This essay is indicative of something that is very wrong within black America. Not the "niggers" whom Ridley chooses to denigrate, but the various spokespersons (Cosby, Juan Williams, et al) who choose to stand up in public and bash them. This discussion is dominated far more by stereotype than actual reality. That 5% incarceration statistic that Ridley cites is only part of the reality, as some 70% of African Americans are incarcerated on non-violent drug charges.
Before we work ourselves into a righteous tizzy about immorality and drug use, those incarcerated blacks are 80% of those arrested although blacks constitute only about 12% of the users of illegal drugs in this country.
Regarding the drop-out statistics, the latest numbers have about 85.2% of blacks completing high school (as compared to 86.4% of whites.) Similarly black violent crime has been declining for the past 12 years and black teen pregnancy is the lowest it has been since 1968.
Yet writers of Ridley's ilk are able to generate huge amounts of attention for daring to "tell it like it is."
It is sad that barely a year past Katrina we are not offended by a black man publicly arguing that we should bid the black poor farewell and tell them to fend for themselves.
Willliam Jelani Cobb
Jelani-
Good points, particularly on the breakdown of those statistics. That is almost good news. Considering that Ridley bases the majority of his argument on Cleveland incident, though, I don't believe that entirely discredits his argument.
I don't have any problem discussing this in "public" though, and by the repeated use of that word I assume you mean in front of white folks. I don't care what they think about black America anymore, positive or negative. The Civil Rights era is over: there is nothing they have that a PR campaign can give us anymore. Those that would think the worse already do.
I believe our internal need for debate outweighs all other considerations in this matter. If Ridley didn't post his article, or Cosby go on his rants, we wouldn't get to have these discussions. We wouldn't get to read the eloquint rebutals such as the one you just wrote.
I also believe we need to have a larger discussion about personal responsibility, and about changing our mentality to deal with a post-Civil Rights world. The world has changed, and the only way we can too is to engage in open and honest debate.
That said, I wish that debate didn't have to be in Esquire. If we had a major magazine that dealt directly with political issues, we could have done it there, but we don't: Code, Savoy, American Visions all folded from lack of support. Who's fault is that?
Thanks for jumping in.
Mat
I first heard about the article via Hollywood Elsewhere.com. I don't agree with all Ridley's points but I do think internal debate is a good thing.
I think American culture as a whole has given up on personal responsibility.
re: the new black aesthetic, not sure how that is going to go down in the U.S. of A. While things have gotten better, there is some weird attitude regarding what a true black American experience is. My parents came to America in the 60s so my POV might be a little different, it's still valid. I face the same problems as any black American who's family has been here for generations. The "true" Black experience is not only a poor urban one. We are a pretty diverse group of folks, contrary to the media and most of our "leaders".
I don’t want to go off a tangent here, but I think the real problem with Ridleys assertion is the assumption that a “niggerish” mentality and poverty are mutually exclusive. The American WORKING poor do often qualify for wic and welfare, however this speaks more to a society that is willing to pay it’s workers five dollars for an hour of honest work, than any supposed, “niggerish mentality”.
And. . . there is "intenal diversity" ( a class system) within the African American community. Maybe Whites and the media have not acknowledged it yet, but we know full well about our bourgeoisie/Jack and Jill “paper bag” people.
I’m absolutely sick and tired of American’s, ESPECIALLY Black Americans, pretending that America is a meritocracy; that it isn’t part luck, part circumstance and part privilege that define who gets the education, the jobs and the admiration. In fact, we all know that in Capitalist society , somebody's got to be down and out. That’s how it works.
That said, I do agree that the mintsrelesque television shows and rap are absurd, but I also can’t help but thank the media for choosing to air only this crap. People watch and emulate what’s out there. Right now, America is violent and cunsumer driven.
Excuses for failure abound among majority race along with wholesale denial of privilege. White boys are major crap rap consumers.
Everybody needs to examine themselves and their mentality, sure. But how does blackness make us so different from everybody else?
Blackness changes the way we were, are, and will be regarded.
Blackness doesn't make us less than people of another race in same circumstances. So in that light, Ridley's article is ridiculous. If there's a societal problem with a racial underclass, it's because of a flaw in the society, not the inherent fault of class or race.
When the British Empire was ascendant, the lower classes acted out and the upper classes explained it away as inherent class degeneration.
Now we regard underclass blacks in the same fashion.
People are the way they are because of a combination of circumstances, situations along with choices. An upper class British person had far more choices than a lower class one, and a working class person also had significant advantages over the lower class.
Dysfunction isn't a racial thing, and there is something insulting when somebody implies that it has something/everything to do with it.
I don't often read similar articles about other racial groups--that their unfortunate circumstances and complaints are completely because of their inferior and lazy choices.
Ragazza-
I think the idea of what an African American is has changed dramatically in the last 20 years. I think it now has to include first and second generation immigrants among its ranks, thankfully.
Anon-
Good point on the minimum wage. This speaks to the immigration issue as well. The problem is not that Americans won't do the worse jobs anymore, the problem is that the pay scale for the worst jobs has failed to keep up with inflation.
Jack and Jill hasn't been a "brown bag" club in a long long time. It's part of that history, but they've done a good job of moving past that. They do an excellent job of teaching black middle class kids that they are not mere anomalies in a ghetto world.
I agree somewhat on the meritocracy thing. America's not right now, but I think today America's closer to being a meritocracy than ever before. Many of us are still recovering from all the ways we were cheated in the past. But for those that manage to overcome all of the disadvantages, there is more room to flourish than ever.
Monica-
I think everything you said is correct, but I think still that there are specific issues in the black community that are unique. These are not "racial" differences, because of course race does not exist. But they are cultural.
Cultures have world views, mythic structures, and expectations that affect how they deal with the world. In our community, there is a persistent victim mentality. That's not because we are crazy, it's because European America systematically victimized our community for centuries, a victimization that really just ended in our lifetimes.
Part of the victim mentality is the belief that we are absolved from all social responsibility because everything we do is really the fault of our oppressors. Another part is belief that we are powerless to help ourselves, and that only our oppressors can help us by choosing not to victimize us anymore.
It's not that the shape many of our communities are not the fault of white oppression. It's that we ourselves are our only hope for moving beyond that.
In my mind, the proceeding blod entry you made, Matt, about Reconstruction, completely discredits much of what John Ridley has to say in what I believe is a historically uninformed, short-sighted, and irresponsible article. Any in depth exploration of Reconstruction demolished the laughable attempt to hold up Condi and Powell as "the high-water mark of black political power." And to hold up the individual achievements of these two "New Black Americans" as somehow praise-worthy regardless of the negative impact their achievement may have on the average black person reeks of the worst kind of American capitalist-driven individualism, displays an utter lack of comprehension of the way our demockracy works, and shows no inclination to truly transform society for the betterment of everyone. ~jbb
sorry about the typos and the mispelling of your name, Mat. i was feverishly typing!
I think the victim mentality is bandied about, but I think it has little meaning on a practical level. I see a lot of able-bodied black men who simply won't work around here.
In fact I offered some some work for payment around my house and they didn't show up.
I see it as a cultural malaise, but these guys aren't blaming white people. They aren't thinking at all. They can't hold a job anymore than any depressed person on SSDI can.
They are mired down in some sort of muddy mental and spiritual inertia, ashamed to apply for a job from the white man, knowing they can't show up regularly because of their self-medicating their misery on drugs and alcohol.
When they do get jobs, do you realize how they are treated off the bat? They're treated like niggers. A person can overcome this through showing differently--but it takes more than they have. Maybe their great-great grandfathers had it and lost it during Reconstruction, dang, but whatever, the malady is more than victim mentality.
They fail. And they hate themselves some more. They self medicate again.
I don't know what the answer is, but it's deeper than a band aid or a government program. These guys are victims, but they don't know much beyond how they're going to get their next few dollars for beer.
There are so many black men like this, living off women, barely living at all.
They're not niggers, they're broken. They don't blame the white men, rather, they hate themselves too.
I don't know how I missed this.
In wrestling with the Cincinatti (not Cleveland) case, Ridley ignores the fact that the Cincinatti police are some of the most corrupt and racist police officers this side of the Mississippi. They have a long history of brutalizing black citizens, MOST of them law-abiding.
And if excellence in leadership is what we should be striving for, I'm not sure why Rice and Powell would be chosen given their actions in moving the US towards invasion.
If you have some time, read the article from the standpoint of a prose critic. Not only is it analytically bankrupt, it reads poorly.
we don't need this type of tripe to have conversations about black political challenges and opportunities. why do you think we do?
Part of the victim mentality is the belief that we are absolved from all social responsibility because everything we do is really the fault of our oppressors. Another part is belief that we are powerless to help ourselves, and that only our oppressors can help us by choosing not to victimize us anymore.
I'm teaching my black politics class in literally ten minutes so I don't have a great deal of time here. What I will say is two things:
1) there is no empirical proof for the above assertion. there is on the other hand a great deal of "barbershop proof." one should not be mistaken for the other.
2) the biggest problem we have to deal with as black people is that comparatively speaking we don't get as much out of our government in the way of equitable treatment and services as our peers. to the degree that the "responsibility" angle neatly dovetails with the "don't ask government for shit" angle, this problem is made worse.
jbb-
I know, the thing about posting is the damn typos; I'm used to printing my text out to check for them.
I totally hear you, but I don't think that the two arguments are contrary. Yes, they did this to us. But also yes, we have to work our way out of this situation, because if we wait for white folks to do it we'll be having these same conversations in a hundred years. So while they are responsible for the past, we are responsible for the present. All of us as black people, not just the poor.
Monica-
I disagree with you strongly on the victim issue, I think it's a huge part of our culture at this point, our rhetoric, our mythology, and how we see the world. Everytime Al Sharpton opens his mouth, I hear it. Everytime another rapper feels comfortable pretending to be a homicidal sociopath because he thinks it reflects more on the society that created him than himself, I see it in action.
I do agree with you on the issue of Depression, though, which is also a huge problem in our impoverished areas, just as it is in every area plagued by poverty. Poor neighborhoods display those symptoms of chronic depression just like people: lethargy, self medication, irritability, slovenliness. That definitely needs to be addressed as such.
Lester Spence-
While certainly important background information, I don't think the fact that the Cleveland POs are racist as all hell changes the assertion that we have an outmoded response strategy to these sorts of incidents, or that our self-proclaimed leadership is jingoistic, intellectually dishonest and increasingly out of step with the times.
I think pieces like this have to be read with an understanding that they are rants, and rants have common weaknesses. But at the same time, there can be real ideas of interest within them.
Another weakness of the Ridley piece is that it pretends that Condi and Collin were more than remote-controlled robots in their endeavors, which time has proven false. Condi has been an unwavering yes-woman in times when criticism was desperately needed. And Powell's tenure was defined by the fact that he was completely ignored except during those moments when he was exploited.
From the standpoint of pure rhetoric and logic, it is relatively easy to prove the inherent flaws in using a victim versus an empowerment argument. Much has been done on this topic in feminist theory over the last 20 years, particularly in relation to rape (do a Muse search for a years worth of reading on the subject). Regardless of whether one agrees with this brand of social theory, it's hardly "barbershop philosophy."
The piece is very flawed, but I don't think that it is worthless. I think we need to start focusing on what we can do for ourselves, as opposed to what the government should do for us. Not because the government shouldn't do for us, but because they never will effectively. I think we also need to start openly challenging the validity of our self-appointed, archaic leadership.
I also think that we as a people need to stop indulging in indignation as a defense mechanism. It's so easy, and it's so intellectually lazy. Once we decide we are offended, that we are outraged, that we are again the victims, we shut down to any further discussion. We simply can't afford to do that anymore
Kid, it's CINCINATTI, not Cleveland!! :)
I didn't talk about barbershop theory, though I guess it would be that. I talked about "barbershop proof." If we talk about whether blacks have or do not have a "culture of victimization" we should be able to generate some form of test that proves or disproves that assertion. But usually when someone makes the claim--either off the cuff (or the blog), or in a social science treatise--the empirical proof simply isn't there.
Finally it's taken as a given--again given our current political context--that "doing for ourselves" is juxtaposed against "getting government to do for us". And somehow that approach is rendered equal to "being a victim."
We are one of the very few constituencies who are making this intellectual leap. Even cultural conservatives expect (and work hard) to get something out of their tax dollars.
Lester-
Yeah, right, I knew it was one of those cities in Ohio that begins with C!
Social theories are hard to prove, and very hard to disprove. Cultural mythology even more so. What Ridley offers about the reactions to the shooting, the mass romanticization of the boy's history, the misleading slogan that emerged, are exactly the types of evidence a social anthropologist would use to define this mythology.
I think that is the key: that these ideas of self-reliance and assistance shouldn't be considered opposites. That it's not an either or situation between getting benefits from our government and taking care of ourselves. Neither way will work on its own. For it to work, we have to do both.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home