Should we push to remove Hip-Hop Concerts?

[*bfine32*]

(07-07-2015, 02:48 PM)GMDino Wrote: Oh...now a "portion" "promotes" it.

Got it.

I actually said a percentage of rap music before you joined the discussion. So nope, not now.

[*bfine32*]

(07-07-2015, 02:55 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Please review Post #5

Good eye.

I should have chosen my wording more carefully when trying to show the difference in a link that has a black man getting stabbed at a concert in comparison to a white man getting beaten at a concert.

[GMDino]

(07-07-2015, 02:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I actually said a percentage of rap music before you joined the discussion. So nope, not now.

(07-07-2015, 01:28 AM)bfine32 Wrote: The fact that folks are looking to remove the symbol while ignoring the cause.

If The Confederate Flag is a symbol of hate and racism, then isn't hip-hop a symbol of violence and racism?  

Then you changed....

(07-07-2015, 12:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: If you don't think there is a good percentage of Hip-Hop music that promotes, illegal activities, violence, and racisim; then we just disagree.

Not sure what the Black Panthers have to do with the article posted about violence at a concert. What is that definition of False Equivalance again?

(07-07-2015, 12:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It's just the hipocrisy that is amusing.

[*bfine32*]

(07-07-2015, 02:57 PM)Benton Wrote: Uh... you were the one validating the "Confederate Flag is a symbol of hate and racism" theory in an attempt to discourage hip hop.


The flaw here is hip hop isn't a perpetrator. The whatever it was you posted was about a white guy beaten up by black guys, not audible vibrations.

So, your association is black+church=provocation of a white racist is equal to white+hip hop=provocation of a black racist(s). What you're saying is black+church=provocation of a white racist is equal to white=provocation of hip hop listening black racists.

The Confederate Flag was not the perpetrator in the Church shooting, but there is a movement across the nation to have images of it removed.

However, I always prefer to light a candle instead of curse the darkness; so I have a solution.

We just need to put warning labels on images of Confederate Flags. That should solve the issue.

[GMDino]

(07-07-2015, 02:55 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Please review Post #5

(07-07-2015, 03:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Good eye.

I should have chosen my wording more carefully when trying to show the difference in a link that has a black man getting stabbed at a concert in comparison to a white man getting beaten at a concert.

[SteelCitySouth]

(07-07-2015, 03:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Good eye.

I should have chosen my wording more carefully when trying to show the difference in a link that has a black man getting stabbed at a concert in comparison to a white man getting beaten at a concert.

I'm sure you chose them appropriately.

[Benton]

(07-07-2015, 03:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The Confederate Flag was not the perpetrator in the Church shooting, but there is a movement across the nation to have images of it removed.

However, I always prefer to light a candle instead of curse the darkness; so I have a solution.

We just need to put warning labels on images of Confederate Flags. That should solve the issue.

The flag was arbitrary. The shooter has been posted with multiple dogma and icons, some of which are used by hate groups. The flag didn't promote or cause the shooting, at least not in the manner that you're saying hip hop led to the white guy getting beaten.

Personally, I'm of the same mind with both. If people use something on their own and it's not directly causing harm, leave it alone. The flag isn't directly harming people, ignorant racists are. Hip hop isn't either, ignorant racists are.

[*rfaulk34*]

(07-07-2015, 01:24 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: I must be misunderstanding by what you mean by "remove the symbol".  

The disconnect is the emphasis on different parts of the sentence. You're focusing on the symbol and he's focusing on the cause. 

Just what i took away from the exchange.

[SteelCitySouth]

(07-07-2015, 05:03 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: The disconnect is the emphasis on different parts of the sentence. You're focusing on the symbol and he's focusing on the cause. 

Just what i took away from the exchange.

Actually I was looking at the "removal" and thus speaking about the flag at the state house.  I, am yet to have clarity as to what he is talking about.

If he is instead speaking of "removal of a symbol" from a privately owned business well I also provided a pretty clear stance on that as well.

[Vas Deferens]

(07-07-2015, 02:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Not sure I could put a number on it; loose estimate on racisim alone: 5% Of course that varies with what the listener considers "promoting racisim". Serious question: What percentage do you say is acceptable?

Now as far as Violence, misogyny, drug use, and other illegal activities I would put the percentage much higher. Some consider 25% a modest estimate. Serious question: What percentage do you say is acceptable?

I see the direction folks are trying to steer the discussion. The purpose of the OP was to illustrate that the "symbol" is probably a whole lot less to blame that the criminal.

I do not think that everone that listens to hip-hop is racist, but I also don't think that everyone that owns a Confederate Flag or its image is racist.  

Thanks for answering honestly.

5% is unequivocally over inflated.  I can tell you that flat out. 

Understand what you're getting at here, but the problem is that the confederate flag was co-opted and became the specifc outward symbol, the logo if you will, of racists and white supremacists.  That may not be its original ethos, it may not be the intention of many who display it publicly or privately, but it was adopted by hate mongers  and came to represent that ideology to the masses.  The racists may even be the minority, but they get all the attention because they're dumb and the public likes to shine a light on and look down at ignorance.  Bottom line is you can't let dumb dumbs use your symbology and expect not to get lumped into the publics perception of others waving the same flag.


  

[BmorePat87]

(07-07-2015, 12:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I agree it would be ignorant to ban something, just becuase of an isolated incident.

I agree. Out of curisoity, are you trying to compare this to the attempts to "ban" (really remove) the confederate flag in the wake of the Charleston killings?

[*rfaulk34*]

(07-07-2015, 05:22 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Actually I was looking at the "removal" and thus speaking about the flag at the state house.  I, am yet to have clarity as to what he is talking about.

If he is instead speaking of "removal of a symbol" from a privately owned business well I also provided a pretty clear stance on that as well.

What i read, from RICHMOND's question was that he was saying the flag is a symbol of hate and racism and he was equating hip hop to being a symbol of hate and racism in the same manner of speaking. Cause and effect.

I could be wrong though. I wasn't reading all around that particular part. Just what you two were discussing and it seemed to be that you were on completely different pages.

[BmorePat87]

(07-07-2015, 02:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: First of all: why are folks trying so hard to make it a black and white issue? I didn't even mention race until I responded to post #13 that introduced the "race card". It's just easier to attack someone's POV once you label them a racist.

To be fair, you posted a story that said 40 black men attacked a white man at a rap concert because he was white and then just said "Should we push to remove Hip-Hop concerts".

The racial overtones were there from the beginning.

You also have a history of citing white supremacists/separatists to back up your arguments about minorities.

[masonbengals fan]

(07-07-2015, 02:49 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'm not saying you are making it a black and white issue, but 40 black guys beating up one white guy is a black and white issue in my mind.

That's what went thru my mind when I saw the news. Does that make me a racist?

[SteelCitySouth]

(07-07-2015, 06:00 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: What i read, from RICHMOND's question was that he was saying the flag is a symbol of hate and racism and he was equating hip hop to being a symbol of hate and racism in the same manner of speaking. Cause and effect.

I could be wrong though. I wasn't reading all around that particular part. Just what you two were discussing and it seemed to be that you were on completely different pages.

i get all that...what is meant by removal....removal from where?

[*rfaulk34*]

(07-07-2015, 06:13 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: i get all that...what is meant by removal....removal from where?

"while ignoring the cause", i think, is what the focus was meant to be on.

That's what spurred the equivalence. 

[SteelCitySouth]

(07-07-2015, 06:19 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: "while ignoring the cause", i think, is what the focus was meant to be on.

That's what spurred the equivalence. 

there are two discussions we were having...one was about his false equivalence, the other was me answering his question as to why i was talking about the state house grounds.  neither of them are directly related.  

[SunsetBengal]

(07-07-2015, 03:14 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Why would they bother to ask any questions when they can just look at the color of their skin and know that the white guy could not have done anything wrong?

That's all you have to know, right?

Yeah Fred, just when a black guy got shot and killed, after robbing a store, beating a cop, and trying to steal his gun.  Half a Nation jumped to the dead guy's defense, because it was racism...

[Johnny Cupcakes]

We should just remove all black people. This way, they can't assemble in a public place and the pale faces won't have to worry about the darkies.

[fredtoast]

(07-07-2015, 02:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No doubt every fight that ever occured in any venue is relevant to one man getting attacked by upwards of 40 people.

It was a one on one fight for a long time.  Stop trying to act like he was just attacked by a gang.

but since all the police saw how it started we know for sure that the white didn't do or say anything to provoke anyone.

BTW why is it that we can't see the police who claimed this all started over racial motives?  if he was there and saw how it started why didn't he do anything to stop it?

Bnut, hey, a policeman who says a white guiy was innocent can't be wrong.  isn't that what you based your entire opinion on?