Marc Lamont Hill

Mamas Don’t Let Your Babies Grow Up to Be Thugs

Across America, many Black boys are increasingly embracing the “thug life.” Once they reach adulthood, this embracement of the thug life persists. Although I understand that in the postmodern epoch there are various notions of what a thug is, all of these notions are ultimately harmful to Black boys. From the earliest age possible, Black boys need to have greater expectations from their parents than for them to live a thug life. It’s not enough to say that you keep your boys away from hip-hop music and violent video games and movies. Those things are not really what you should primarily concern yourself with. You should concentrate more on helping them to establish a pathway for a successful life. This could mean that even before the child enters into kindergarten, you begin to stress the importance of education to him or her and you become actively involved in his or her education. As soon as possible, begin to talk to your child about going to college or getting some post-secondary training. You can teach your child to be a hustler but being a hustler does not have to have criminality attached to it. Many of the best living Black men in America are hustlers in their own right—Dr. Marc Lamont Hill, Dr. Cornel West, Jerry Rice, Bishop T.D. Jakes, President Barack Obama, John Edgar Wideman, John Legend, Richard Dean Parsons, J.C. Watts, Colin Powell, Wayne Brady, and Montel Williams. Now, I’m not saying that these men are perfect—none of us are. I’m also not saying that they did not have struggles, setbacks, and challenges because they all did.  The one thing they all had was a determination to be successful and not thugs. They all had people in their lives, including their parents, who were willing to love them enough to help them develop a mindset focused on success.

I’m not trying to tell you exactly how to rear your children—I’m not qualified to do this. What I’m doing, however, is telling you that your children deserve to have parents who are committed to their success. They need you from birth to help them to understand how to be successful and to assist them with creating a pathway to success—this I’m qualified to tell you about. Every child deserves a chance to succeed!

A number of the Black boys who I grew up with and went to school with embraced deviant behavior even in kindergarten and many of their parents would get angry with the teachers and principals for exposing their poor behavior. Instead of the parents working to improve these boys’ behavior, they simply blamed the teachers and principals for their behavior. These parents needed to face the fact that their boys were simply exhibiting poor behavior. This poor behavior persisted for many of these Black boys into their teenage years where many became involved in using and selling drugs, having babies out of wedlock, getting sent to jail or youth detention centers, dropping out of school, and etc. I have to admit that some of their parents really tried to prevent them from getting involved in these things, but the boys elected to continue on with the poor behavior that they had engaged in since they were in kindergarten. Their parents never broke the cycle of poor behavior. Their parents did not stop them then and now that they were teenagers they embraced their deviant behavior as acceptable conduct.

These same boys now venerate bling bling over education. They treasure dope over hope. Why? Because they needed parents to give them positive examples of success when they were old enough to begin to understand notions of success. They needed to benefit from parents who made a serious commitment to establish a structure in the home that was geared toward success. They needed parents who did not mind saying to them that they were not rearing thugs!

As a community, we have to take the success of all Black boys into our hands when parents are not doing even to prevent their boys from becoming thugs. We have to be willing to tell them and show them what success is. We have to be willing to model success for them. It’s not enough for you to simply walk around and criticize these Black boys. When you see a Black boy who is not demonstrating the values, principles, and actions of a burgeoning successful man, then do what you can to help the boy. This may mean that you need to go talk to his parents and express an interest in investing in his future by doing things with him that are going to facilitate a successful life for him.

It’s time for us to reclaim our Black boys from futures dominated by incarceration, disease, gang activity, dope dealing, and robbery. I have committed my life to progressing Black boys and men to be the successes they deserve to be. What are you doing, could be doing, and/or willing to do to help Black boys and men to experience more successful lives?

Antonio Maurice Daniels

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Marc Lamont Hill’s “Hate” for Drake: A Respectful Response

Marc Lamont Hill

Although I have the greatest respect for Dr. Marc Lamont Hill, Columbia University professor, published scholar, and Fox News contributor, I have to respond to his most recent article, “I Hate Drake. There. I Said It” (http://www.theloop21.com/society/i-hate-drake-there-i-said-it). I am such a fan of Dr. Hill. I have read his academic publications, follow his writings on his website (www.marclamonthill.com), have permanently linked his website on my blog, and I follow him on Facebook and Twitter. I posit that Dr. Hill is one the brightest minds and great public intellectuals of our time. Having said all of this, I am quite unsettled and unnerved by his comment that he “hates” Drake. The purpose of this article is to express my problems with Dr. Hill’s promulgation of his “hate” for Drake, and to respond to his problems with some of the current artists on the hip-hop scene.

First of all, the word “hate” is a powerful word to direct at a person. Dr. Hill is a scholar and social justice activist who fights against past and postmodern “hate” and discrimination in his work inside and outside of the academy. Mahatma Gandhi once said, “We who seek justice will have to do justice to others.” While I certainly support and embrace Gandhi’s statement, Dr. Hill’s recent comments about Drake do not reflect that he supports and embraces this statement in its totality. He has to understand that his investment in elucidating and illuminating the value of hip-hop is significantly undermined when he uses such language to attack one of the leading hip-hop artists, Drake. Marc makes me wonder if he has a problem with the reality that Drake is half Canadian and the fact that he is one of the most prominent faces on the current hip-hop scene. Although Dr. Hill argues that this is not the case, the fact that he does not give his reader a strong understanding as to why he “hates” Drake makes me really curious (at best). Now, Drake’s music alone cannot cause Marc to legitimately hate Drake. I would love for him to offer his readers a more thorough explanation for why he hates Drake.

Dr. Hill tries to make the argument that Drake’s lyrics lack substance. I would like to encourage him to engage in a deeper exploration of the powerful messages communicated by Drake’s “Over” and “Successful.” When you listen to these two songs, Dr. Hill, you cannot honestly say that Drake is just a “pop song writer.”  Dr. Hill, even some of the greatest rappers attempted to sing parts of their verses; therefore, Drake should not be penalized because he can sing. If Drake does have a proclivity to resort to the superficial instead of the substantial in his work (as Dr. Hill asserts), then it is more of a reflection of how artists are conforming to the cultural logic of late capitalism and not simply something Drake should be held solely responsible for.

Dr. Hill seems to want rappers to be in the mold of Nas. He will not consider a rapper a true MC if he does not reflect the rap tradition of rappers like Nas. I find this to be highly problematic. For hip-hop to be true hip-hop, it does not have to fit Marc’s limited definition of it. It does not have to simply be highly reflective of rappers like Nas. One of the dimensions of hip-hop that people have grown to love is its ability to accommodate new artists and their particular expressions within hip-hop. Hip-hop, at its best, is about tolerance. Drake’s style of hip-hop, which I do not see as departing from traditional hip-hop in any subversive or meaningful way, respects the tradition of hip-hop. Drake is a serious hip-hop lyricist and MC—no matter what Dr. Hill says (no disrespect).

Marc said that Drake has a fake Southern-style voice, one that is tailored for corporate interests. Well, Marc, I was born and reared in the South and I certainly do not hear any southern accent in Drake’s sound. I simply need Dr. Hill to be more thorough in his examination of Drake, and to give stronger reasons for his “hate” for Drake. Even when I have disagreed with Marc in the past on issues, I have always understood his arguments and rationales. On this issue, however, Marc has left me (and us) with much to be desired.

Antonio Maurice Daniels

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Related articles

 

Larry King’s Racist and Exploitative Interview with T.I.

Larry King

After being informed by my best friend, Santresa L. Glass-Hunt, that T.I. would be having an interview with Larry King, I could not wait to turn my television to view the interview.  As a great fan of T.I., I knew that this would be a good interview. Unfortunately, I witnessed Larry King making a conscious effort to exploit and be racist to T.I. and Black men collectively. King was relentless in framing and asking queries that put T.I. in negative light.  Of course, some of my readers will say I am going too far with my calling Larry King’s interview with T.I. racist. In Critical Race Theory: The Cutting Edge, Richard Delgado writes, “CRT [Critical Race Theory] begins with a number of basic insights. One is that racism is normal, not aberrant, in American society. Because racism is an ingrained feature of our landscape, it looks ordinary and natural to persons in the culture” (p. xiv). I could not agree more with Delgado on this point. Racism is so normal in our society that we do not always know it when we see it.  In the postmodern epoch, I see racism operating in a much more troubling way now: It is much more subtle and does not appear in such overt ways as it did during slavery and Jim Crow days. Drawing upon Delgado’s insights about racism, this article serves to highlight how Larry King’s interview with T.I. was intentionally racist and exploitative to T.I. and Black men collectively.

The paucity of sophistication with which the mainstream media employs to discuss and engage Black males has always been problematic. Larry King has continued in the racist and exploitative tradition of the mainstream media’s coverage of the Black male.  In his most recent interview with T.I., he never asked him a question that did not carry some negative weight with it.  Even when he asked one question that was supposed to be seen as a positive question, he decorated it with the negative dimensions of T.I.’s past. King did not want to give any significance to the good work T.I. has done before and after he has been released from prison.  Even when King did show him talking to young people situated in a juvenile detention center, King gave little attention to it.  It was almost like King was showing the small clip of T.I. speaking to the juvenile delinquents as a measure of defense against anticipated charges of racism. He could have avoided charges of racism and bias by making his questions more balanced, and understanding that there is much more to T.I. than what he went to prison for.

King’s line of questioning was aimed at showing that T.I. is dangerous, and for White people not to be fooled by the fact that he is articulate and well-groomed man; he wanted White people to know that this Black man is still dangerous. This is why he continued to ask questions about T.I.’s time in the prison, guns, and violence. While I understand that T.I. was on his show to talk about his recent experience in prison, he was also on the show to talk about his release from prison. I would, therefore, have expected to witness King give him a number of questions about what he is going to do now that he is out of jail. If Mr. King was so interested in talking about T.I.’s involvement with guns, violence, drugs, and his economically and socially disadvantaged upbringing, then why not ask him questions about how he is going to use his experiences with these things to improve his lives and/or the lives of others.  He could have also asked him how these experiences have had an impact on where he currently is in his life.

Instead of asking T.I. queries that are more forward looking, and that can actually demonstrate to people how to move beyond these negative things, King wanted to keep his audience focused on how “horrible” T.I., his life, and upbringing are. Larry King was frustrated with what he saw before him—an educated Black man who has had some misfortunes with the law, but still remains a successful hip-hop artist, business man, actor, and loving father. Some White men simply cannot handle Black men who are young, educated, and successful. Even Black men who have had a little trouble with the law and still remain successful, they seem to threaten the power structure that some White men have worked tirelessly to keep in place. Questions are often raised in the mainstream media about the civility and decency of Black men. T.I. showed Larry King just how civil and decent we can be—even when we know a White man is attempting to exploit us on national television. T.I. never got rude with Mr. King or started yelling at him. You know some people don’t think that Black men can engage in a serious conversation without getting rude and yelling.

One of the positives dimensions of the interview had nothing to do with Larry King himself, but with the people who called in to ask T.I. questions.  You could tell how much the people loved and supported him. One woman was so excited to have the opportunity to talk to T.I. that she admitted she was nervous. It would have been nice to see Larry King reflect some of the goodwill his callers did. After all, T.I. did grant him the first interview he had since he was released from prison. Now, where’s the decency and civility of this White man?

I know many people from Atlanta who say that they grew up in Atlanta where T.I. did (and some even say they went to school with him) and that he had choices to make and he made them. Well, “scholars,” thank you very much for stating the obvious.  When people try to suggest that they “made it” in Atlanta without having to go to prison, then I simply want to say to you congratulations. The social reality is, however, many people’s conditions were and are different, which lead them to different outcomes than those of you who “made it out” of Atlanta without experiencing trouble with the law. As Black people, we have to be careful with our lack of thorough critiques of our own people because we can be just as racist as Larry King was during his interview. Yes, T.I. had choices to make and he certainly made them. Those choices got him a little prison time but yielded him many millions. How many millions do you have?

I heard many Black people say that T.I. is so articulate during and after the interview with Larry King. Yes, he is certainly articulate. I would like, however, for Black people to stop being so stunned when you see and hear an articulate Black man. We can be articulate too! Larry King was unsettled and unnerved by this Black man who he found himself to be superior, yet T.I. was more articulate than he is. Despite how articulate T.I. proved to be, Mr. King wanted America to know that this is still a “thug nigga”—so beware!

Although I thought Larry King was a pretty okay guy before the T.I. interview, he revealed his true racist self during the interview. I am not suggesting that anyone boycott Mr. King or anything of the like. I would just suggest that we need to be more watchful of his line of questioning and treatment of a particular type of Black male—those like T.I. He treats those Black men like Michael Eric Dyson, Marc Lamont Hill, Cornel West, and others of this elite Black male status with great decency, but not those Black males like T.I. His feeling of the superiority of whiteness allowed him to see himself in a higher class position than T.I., leading to a fusion of racism and classism. T.I. deserved to be treated with much more respect.  Today, I salute T.I. for how he handled himself during the interview and for the commitment to helping young people, especially young people of color, to avoid a life of trouble.

Antonio Maurice Daniels

University of Wisconsin-Madison