Dave Chappelle: The Victim

by with No Comment CultureFeaturedSocial Issues

“The Closer” is dividing critics and fans of epoch-defining comedian, Dave Chappelle.

An “equal opportunity offender” for most of his career, the widely recognized GOAT in Stand-Up has spent a considerable portion of his last four Netflix specials either commenting/joking about trans issues or defending himself against criticisms by members of the trans community.

For most of his career, Chappelle has focused his observational humor on racism and his experience as a Black man in a very White nation. His early jokes were rich with cutting truths that laid bare the hypocrisies and evils of a country whose initial prosperity sprang from slavery.

With wit and satire, The Chappelle Show helped an entire generation of all races think and even laugh about the poison of racism. Dave’s experience as a Black man made his art personal, authentic, and believable. He could say shocking things with impunity because he owned the experience he was presenting.

With “The Closer,” Chappelle seems to be pleading his case more than simply trying to entertain. He is wondering aloud how the trans movement has gained so much traction and influence while Black Civil Rights movements from MLK all the way to BLM still struggles. He posits that Civil Rights leaders in the 60s had to make real, sometimes mortal sacrifices for change while today’s social Justice warriors mostly form woke Twitter mobs to cancel their opposition and wear “pussy hats” to raise awareness for their cause (neither being very effective).

He has some valid points within these comedic jabs, and if he is to be taken in good faith, perhaps there is much to be learned. The idea of “roasting” someone or something is to ridicule, exaggerate, and criticize every single possible weakness so that when the subject survives the lambasting, they are much stronger, maybe even invulnerable. Roasting is an exercise in building thicker skin.

If Dave is truly an ally (this seems up for debate), then the LGBTQ+ community would do well to take his jokes deeper than face value and try to use them to become stronger, maybe even laughing them off like all of Chappelle’s other targets that must do the same to enjoy his humor.

But, in this latest Netflix special, I can’t help but notice a seeming personal stake that Chappelle has in not just making jokes, but condemning those who have condemned him. It seems personal.

Everyone wants to believe they are “the good guy.” But a champion for justice and truth would not pick unworthy targets, right? A powerful mechanism of Comedy is how it maintains the status quo by ridiculing the outliers of society. The majority doesn’t like something about a minority, so a joke could be used to point out that difference in a mocking way and make the majority feel comfortable in their bigotry or ignorance. It’s a very regressive use of comedy and one Chappelle would probably never wish (intentionally) to use…

But perhaps that is exactly what he has been doing to the trans community for four Netflix specials now. And when they tell him they are victims and not worthy of this ridicule for all they have endured, Dave doubles down. He now believes *he* is *their* victim (or at least people he admires like Kevin Hart and DaBaby).

Perhaps the blind spot in Dave Chappelle’s hubris is that his success comes from speaking on his personal experience against injustice and hypocrisy that affected him. Audiences gained universal truth from his subjective experience because he eloquently captured and criticized them with the highest degree of wit.

White people were commonly a target of Chappelle’s most stinging accusations, but they heralded the comedian. Perhaps, deep down, they agreed with him and recognized the work still needing to be done in regards to race relations.

The trans community is not taking their abuse as kindly (for the most part – I have seen some positive reviews while scouring google, Reddit, and Twitter).

This vitriol from members of the trans community means either they have some growth needed to embrace the ridicule we are all subjected to when we have a place at the table, or maybe Dave is really doing more damage than he wants to acknowledge or believe. He ended his special saying something to the effect of, “I’m done telling trans jokes until y’all can handle it.”

Imagine if a White comedian tried to represent Black issues like Chappelle has? It would seem a bit out of place. Chappelle ridicules White people because he has felt antagonized by many Whites. He ridicules Black people because he has lived the Black experience. It doesn’t seem like Dave has any credible connection to the trans community apart from his friend, Daphne, that gives him authenticity in his use of the subject for humor.

Maybe these trans jokes should be told by the “Dave Chappelle of trans comedians” instead.

Similar Read: “I Haven’t Found (The Humor In) It, Nor Do I Seek It”

An Icon on the Hill & Beyond

by with No Comment CultureFeaturedPolitics

Georgia Representative John Lewis was labeled as the humble giant on the Hill. However, his colleagues referred to him as the Conciseness of Congress. He’ll be remembered for his continuous fight for Voter’s Right, his lifetime fight for all people. 

At the 1963 March on Washington where Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his famous “I Have a Dream” address, Civil Rights leaders asked John Lewis to tone his speech down afraid that it would be too much and would cause controversy. Lewis was the last living speaker at the march on Washington.

On October 8, 2013, Lewis was arrested outside on Capitol Hill for civil disobedience while he was standing up with protestors for Immigration reform. Nothing new for Lewis… he had been arrested 40+ times for peacefully protesting when the stakes were just as high. On October June 12, 2016, the nation was shocked by another shooting. This time it was the Pulse Night Club, a gay night club that was personally targeted in Orlando, Florida. On June 22, Rep. Lewis held a floor sit-in on the floor of The US House of Representatives just ten days after the Shooting. The sit-in protest, which was to fight specifically for gun control, lasted for more than 12 hours with roughly 40 Democratic House Representatives by his side. 

Lewis was not just an icon on the Hill, but beyond. In fact, he was mainly known for his work and legacy off the Hill. He was born the son of sharecroppers on February 21, 1940, outside of Troy, Alabama. He was inspired by the activism surrounding the Montgomery Bus Boycott and the words of the late Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., which he heard on radio broadcasts. He made a decision at a very young age to become a part of the Civil Rights Movement. While a student at Fisk University, John Lewis organized sit-in demonstrations at segregated lunch counters in Nashville, Tennessee. In 1961, he volunteered to participate in the Freedom Rides, which challenged segregation at interstate bus terminals in the Deep South.

From 1963 to 1966, Lewis was named Chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), which he helped form. John Lewis led over 600 peaceful, orderly protestors across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama on March 7, 1965. The marchers were attacked on that bridge by Alabama state troopers in a brutal confrontation that became known as “Bloody Sunday.” He suffered a skull fracture and was one of 58 people treated for injuries at the local hospital. Despite more than 40 arrests, physical attacks and serious injuries, Lewis remained a devoted advocate of the nonviolence philosophy.

In 1981, he was elected to the Atlanta City Council. And in November 1986, he was elected to Congress and served as U.S. Representative of Georgia’s Fifth Congressional District since then. Earlier this year, Lewis attended the 55th-anniversary of the march in Selma, which was a surprise appearance considering his illness. One of his last public appearances was in DC on Black Lives Matter Plaza (16th Street) with Mayor Muriel Bowser. He not only was there to see the name change of 16th Street, but also to witness in person the large display of Black Lives Matter painted in yellow. Such an iconic moment for one of the original fathers of the Black Lives Matter movement to witness. 

In December 2019, Lewis presided over the House vote to restore voter’s rights. The House voted and passed this bill. The Senate never even brought the bill to the floor for a vote. That bill still remains on Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell‘s desk still today. Lewis made his transition from this earth on Friday, July 17, 2020, after his battle with pancreatic cancer. Whenever I now hear the sound of the thunder it will remind me of his thunderous voice of advocacy. His legacy will live on.

Similar Read: You Are NOT Your Ancestors!

Corporate Social Justice, by Jay-Z

by with No Comment CultureFeatured

We look up to our heroes… our athletes, entertainers, those who make it out. Society has deemed us only worthy of certain achievements, so when one of us reaches a certain level… it’s hard to admit, personally or publicly, when that person has messed up, or even worse, compromised their values for personal gain.

Obama was the first Black president. And because he was the first, he can do no wrong. I’m sure you’ve heard this argument before… from the loyal Obama supporter who’s willing do dismiss all reasonable logic when it comes to his presidency… just because he was the first.

Jay-Z is viewed by many in a similar light. He’s a billionaire. The first hip-hop artist to ever reach that status. He set the Blueprint, literally, for millions of innercity youth throughout the country. He’s loved and respected for it, and like Obama, for many, he can do no wrong.

But so exists the Obama supporter and the Jay-Z fan who can also call BS when they see it. If you’re a true fan, you’ve earned the right to criticize your heroes when they do unheroic shit. 

So when Jay-Z announced a Roc Nation partnership with the NFL to co-produce their halftime shows moving forward with a social justice campaign caveat attached to it, many people applauded the move, but just as many scratched their head and asked why. It’s a legitimate question, and I think the answer rests with his new corporate partner, the National Football League.

Let’s be honest, the NFL has blackballed Colin Kaepernick. It’s no longer about kneeling, because it if was Eric Reid and Kenny Stills who continue to kneel, wouldn’t have a job. This is about principal, and the NFL owners have decided to not sign him and hold firm to that position. While Kaepernick is not without fault, mainly for choosing to settle his collusion case and for signing a lucrative endorsement deal with Nike, you can make the argument that he did what he was sent to do, which was create a movement worthy of discussion and dialogue.

MLK and Malcolm were assassinated for their convictions. Someone inevitably had to pick up the torch to continue their movements. While Kaep is not a traditional Civil Rights leader, nor do I believe he’s striving to be, he’s still alive and well… it’s hard to justify the advancement of his movement without him being a part of it, especially when you’re set up to get a fat check in the process. For many, that’s common sense, and for others, they’re convinced that Jay-Z has a plan and we should give it time to develop. But you see, that’s not how social justice works.

If we appreciate anything about Dr. Martin Luther King Jr and true social justice, it should be The Letter from Birmingham Jail he wrote in 1963 in response to eight white religious leaders of the South who questioned his visit to Birmingham, Alabama. If we just trust King’s intuition and grace in a moment of great contention and perceived controversy in America, we quickly realize that the “wait and see” strategy has never worked for oppressed communities.

“For years now I have heard the word “wait.” It rings in the ear of every Negro with a piercing familiarity. This “wait” has almost always meant “never.” We must come to see with the distinguished jurist of yesterday that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”” – MLK 

So again, why should we wait, continue to wait, and trust that Jay-Z’s social justice campaign will deliver… with not even a blueprint or list of action steps? We shouldn’t.

The NFL wins big with this partnership. They get one of the best entertainers in the world to manage their Super Bowl halftime shows (which frankly have been hit or miss.) And more importantly, this entertainer happens to be Black and perceived to have a lot of leverage within the Black community. What better way to win back the good graces of many of their Black fans than partnering with one of their biggest heroes.

To make things even worse, we find out that Jay has been working on this deal for a year. If this social justice campaign was intended to be impactful, why wouldn’t they at least highlight the objectives of the campaign when they announced the partnership? Are communities of color expected to wait and see what the campaign entails?

Jay chose income over community, personal gain over values, and he’s paying the price for it. A week later and we’re still waiting on any details regarding this social just campaign. We can’t afford to wait… on the NFL, or Jay-Z.

The Rohingya Massacre: A Crisis the West Rather Not Cover

by with One Comment FeaturedGlobal

The United Nations considers the Rohingya people the “most persecuted minority group in the world.” It’s time we start paying attention. 

[Silent] Genocide: The Rohingya Massacre… We originally published this article on 11 September 2017. The crisis has unfortunately worsened since then. If you haven’t heard about the Rohingya Massacre, likely due to the West and major news orgs choosing not to cover it, please read our short piece below to catch up on a story everyone should know about. 

I was scrolling through my newsfeed last week and noticed some of my friend’s updates and funny videos from Labor-Day weekend. While scrolling, I also saw that one of my friends had posted a link from The Economist talking about the Rohingya genocide that is currently taking place in Burma (Myanmar). In a short blurb above the article, she wrote in capital letters, “WHY ISN’T ANYONE TALKING ABOUT THIS!”

I’ve known about this conflict prior to seeing her post, but she made a good point – why isn’t this being discussed on major news networks? I have read time and time again about the intensity and cruelty that is taking place at this moment across the world in Burma, and it sickens me to know that just this year alone 1,000 Rohingya have been killed in a new crackdown by the Myanmar state. 

Here is a breakdown of what started this conflict and why this is happening…

The Rohingya are Muslims. They are indigenous to Burma’s Rakhine province in the North-West Region that borders the South Asian country, Bangladesh. There are approximately 2 million Rohingya, of which, 1 million are currently living in Burma today.

Despite having historic ties to the land of Burma that have lasted for centuries, the Rohingya people were rendered stateless in 1982 by a highly controversial citizenship law that deliberately excluded them as one of Burma’s natural, and thereby legitimate, ethnicities. Because of this, the Rohingya people have been falsely and cruelly classified as foreigners in their own homeland.

If this was not difficult enough the Citizenship Law of 1982 has since become the staging grounds for the rising tide of Islamophobia in Burma. Biased government led initiatives are being fueled by a strategically planted hatred for Muslims and are designed to alienate the native Rohingya from Burmese Buddhist life.

One of the main initiatives involves the denial of the title “Rohingya” from public discourse. Instead, the incorrect term “Benjali” is being pushed on the Rohingya people to make them seem like foreigners and Muslims to the Burmese people. 

Because of this, the Rohingya people have been pushed to the literal fringes of Burmese society where they are extremely vulnerable, and where human rights abuses are mounting up and becoming quite difficult to document.

Since the violence has started the Rohingya people have been forced to flee to neighboring states, such as Bangladesh, Thailand, and Malaysia. They’ve unfortunately been met with further hostility. Those governments have rejected them and relegated them to a life of complete neglect in refugee camps, which inevitably increases the very real threat of human trafficking. 

In 1967, Martin Luther King Jr said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” These words should ring loud and true for anyone who considers themselves a citizen of the world, and they cannot be ignored just because what you see makes you uncomfortable or helpless. We all belong to this planet and when anyone tries to force one person or a group of us to disappear via genocide, we ALL need to come together and say it loud and clear – that it is NOT OK, and that IT WILL NOT BE IGNORED. I too at times feel that my voice is lost in the multitude of noise that is generated in this busy world we live in; however, that will not stop me from yelling, writing, and talking about issues like the Rohingya genocide because they deserve our attention. The people of Rohingya need and deserve justice, and they’ll never get it if the people who know about the issue refuse to discuss it and bring it to other peoples attention. 

The United Nations considers the Rohingya people the “most persecuted minority group in the world.” It’s time we start paying attention. 

Last year we shared a similar story about 8,000 Muslims who were killed in a designated U.N. “safe haven.” Read about it here: Unknown Genocide

Subscribe for free to stay up to date on the Rohingya Crisis and other international atrocities that aren’t getting the coverage they deserve.

“They Want Some Rice and Chicken?!”

by with 3 Comments Sports

When everyone is rooting for you, and you still find a way to lose? His name is Adrien Broner.

“They want some rice and chicken,” is a perfectly adequate response when asked what do the children want for dinner, not in reference to a group of people… that’s called RACISM.

“I beat him like I was using what they used to beat Martin Luther King,” is never ok to say, like ever… countless people, including Martin Luther King Jr., died for Civil Rights. To joke about it is IGNORANT on so many levels, especially if you’re one of the people they died for.

It’s hard to fabricate such insensitive comments… And that’s why it’s hard to root for a man who has no problem saying them… utter disrespect for his opponent and their culture, and even worse, not understanding the sacrifices others made for him to do what he does today, is unacceptable.

Adrien Broner deserved to lose this past weekend on Showtime Boxing at the Barclays Center in Brooklyn, New York. Instead, some will argue he earned the draw-decision by winning the second half of the fight against Jessie Vargas. If you’re a boxing fan, you know boxing judges seldom get it right. And despite one judge giving Broner the nod (115-113), the biggest shock of the night came after the fight when Broner decided to spew all kinds of racism, ignorance, and homophobia towards his Mexican opponent, Jesse Vargas. When you think about it, maybe it’s not a shock considering Broner’s past antics in press conferences before and after his fights. But if Broner ever had a line to cross, he crossed it this past weekend.

The comments above are just some of the disparaging things he said immediately following the fight. In his remarks, he inferred that the Barclays Center was full of Mexicans. Mexicans, Blacks, Whites, whatever the demographic makeup that night, it was clearly a pro-Broner crowd. The crowd erupted whenever he landed a big shot, and their silence when Vargas did the same, made it pretty clear who they were rooting for. Ironically, the only person who didn’t realize it was Broner himself.

His last few fights were disappointing. But this is America and people love a comeback. With that being said, many considered this his last shot to revitalize his career and get back on track. His lackluster performance in the ring might’ve sealed his fate, and if it didn’t, his comments after the fight surely did.

As I said earlier… It’s hard to root for a man who doesn’t respect his opponent and their culture, and even worse, doesn’t understand the sacrifices others made for him to do what he does today. Broner, do better… despite you not deserving it, something tells me you’ll get another shot.

Blood on the GOP’s Hands

by with 2 Comments Uncategorized

The massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland this past Valentine’s Day has brought forth a debate, the same one that comes up after every mass shooting in recent memory. The issue of gun control is a hot-button; it ignites so much passion on both sides of the aisle that it’s hard to get past the rhetoric and the finger-pointing and the conspiracy theories to see what’s really going on.

The National Rifle Association has been blamed for the rising number of people killed by firearms, including assault weapons – rifles designed for the sole purpose of killing many people in the shortest amount of time with minimal effort. Supporters fight back, citing the Second Amendment, unwilling to give even one inch of ground, for fear of creating a slippery slope of bans, regulations, and limitations.

I’m not against gun ownership. I come from a family of law enforcement officers, and have owned firearms myself. Most NRA members are in favor of responsible and sensible gun laws. I am; however, against owning guns designed for offensive and systematic mass murder. 

The Constitution is vague by design, and can be interpreted in a number of different ways. It’s this vagueness that has made the NRA extremely influential in US politics, and the reason assault rifles and other non-civilian firearms are sold in such vast numbers. While a handful of Democrats have taken money from the NRA, the vast majority of recipients are Republicans.

But this is the tip of the iceberg. Just under $6 million was directly donated to candidates’ campaigns during the 2016 election cycle. The bulk of the NRA’s influence is due to outside, or independent spending –  terms that encompass expenditures for everything other than lining a politician’s pockets. A case in point, an October 2017 Politifact article reveals that the NRA spent more than $200 million on political activities since 1998. Other spending includes promotional efforts, totaling about $250 million per year. 

The NRA didn’t start out as the perceived supporter of murder and mayhem, as some gun control advocates might believe. The humble beginnings consisted of a group of apolitical hobbyists who supported gun safety and responsible gun laws. Some events appear to have changed the focus of the NRA to a lobby for the GOP – the 1966 University of Texas shooting that killed 17 people caused a furor of calls to ban guns, with an equally passionate defense of gun ownership. The assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Bobby Kennedy, among other violent events, resulted in the 1968 Gun Control Act, which started a tug or war between the NRA and gun control advocates, and served to start the ideological path of the association to the hard right. The Cincinnati revolt of 1977 also widened the chasm between sensible gun ownership and rabid Second Amendment defense. 

Membership numbers swelled, which put the NRA on the path as a lobby with money to promote its ideology. Currently membership is around four million members, but donations by members, corporations (including gun manufacturers) and other political entities are significant. Total annual donations by individuals totaled $22 million in 2014.

It’s easy to see how the NRA morphed from advocate for firearms education and safety to radical right-wing lobby, willing to halt any and all legislation to regulate firearms. Let’s call a spade a spade – the NRA doesn’t care about the multitudes of adults and children that are killed by bullets. They relish it – gun control proposals make membership surge, and causes a spike in gun sales. It seems that after every massacre, the NRA gains more power.

However, the mass shooting in Parkland, Florida seems to have given rise to a movement that has the potential to give the NRA a taste of humble pie. These kids are sick of active-shooter drills, and hearing the NRA offer “thoughts and prayers.” They will be the ones in office in just a few years’ time, and are likely to change the face of gun ownership for decades to come. 

Convenient Advocacy

by with No Comment CultureFeatured

On June 20, 2017, a 17-year old Muslim girl named Nabra Hassanen was beaten to death in Northern Virginia after she left the mosque during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan. She was walking with friends when she got into an argument with a driver, who later beat her to death with a baseball bat and threw her body into a pond. Most news outlets called this “an act of road rage,” not a hate crime, as people had initially speculated. As expected, this became a prominent news story in the Muslim community. Considering a large percentage of my social media contacts are Muslim, I saw this story being shared on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and other group chats. Understandably, people were upset that a Muslim teenager was killed in an everyday situation that could’ve easily been them or one of their relatives. Regardless of whether or not this was actually a hate crime, most Muslims were extremely concerned. A fellow Muslim was murdered unjustly, and there was outrage from much of the Muslim community.

Less than 24 hours after Nabra Hassanen was murdered, a pregnant African-American woman named Charleena Lyles was killed in Seattle, Washington by two white police officers. She had called the police because she suspected a burglary. Because Lyles wielded a knife when they arrived, the two officers shot and killed her in front of three of her young children. Lyles had been dealing with mental health issues prior to her murder. As expected, this became a hot topic in the African-American community. This is obviously not the first time an African-American civilian has been killed unjustly by a white law enforcement official, nor will it be the last. The African-American community I am connected with was understandably furious about Lyles’ murder, and many of them were vocal about her murder on social media. A fellow African-American was murdered unjustly, and there was outrage from much of the their community.

The murders of Nabra Hassanen and Charleena Lyles did not occur under the same circumstances, nor are their facts comparable. There are bigger questions to explore regarding both of them (i.e. defining a hate crime, mental health issues, etc.). But I found it extremely notable that the groups of outspoken advocates for Hassanen and Lyles, respectively, did not seem to overlap at all. The Muslims I know were speaking out about Hassanen’s murder, and the African-American people I know were speaking out about Lyles’ murder. It was rare to see a Muslim speaking out about Lyles or an African-American speaking out about Hassanen.

It makes logical sense that minority groups are concerned about issues that directly affect them and their communities. As a Muslim student, hearing about the murder of a Muslim student hits home because I could picture myself as Nabra Hassanen. In the same way, an African-American mother could probably see herself as Charleena Lyles. While the specific details of both murders do not align, there is a common thread: two people of minority groups were killed unjustly by members of a different group. Many people who spoke out on either incident claimed to be standing up for justice, but their advocacy is convenient for them. Convenient advocacy will not be effective when trying to engage in social reform. Dr. Martin Luther King said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” As humans, can we really say we stand up for justice if we are only concerned about injustice in our own communities?