I’m actually quite shocked no one has ever questioned me on my signature on the bottom of every post “Keep it uppity and keep it truthfully radical.” Naturally everyone knows where the “uppity” part comes from, but no one asked about the “truthfully radical” part.
There was a clip, pulled from YouTube last time I checked, from a 2006 rally in downtown Chicago where Rev. Otis “I stopped wearing bowties” Moss III gave an impassioned speech about hip hop and at the end his charge to the Soulja Boy generation was to “keep it truthful and to keep it radical” at the same time. I was sold.
And I don’t think I’ve ever seen, in my life time, that is, such a deliberate thrust of mainstream and the status quo. Usually these entities have such a life of their own, that they really don’t require conscious push in various media outlets; the power of conformity is enough on it’s own. However, with the recent round of Obama bashings that are set to begin this week, via Sarah “I’m a moose and don’t read newspapers” Palin who’s CLEARLY getting her talking points from FoxNews a la Sean Hannity, it’s a wonder my ass isn’t on a ship being deported back to Africa as I type.
Seriously, we’re living in a country where being “radical” is a bad thing.
What is radical anyway?
Is radical merely questioning the status quo? Does questioning the status quo or mainstream mean that one will be moved to actions later on in life. I’m not about to do a roll call of radicalism in this country, but I will say that if black folk had just went with the status quo, we’d still be in slavery somewhere, or at best still be considered second-class citizens without full rights afforded by the Constitution.
I want to know why are we, as a collective country, allowing for people like a Sean Hannity or even a Sarah Palin dictate to us what conversation we should be having? Sarah Palin has her own pastor problem people don’t want to talk about; she has her own husband problem people don’t want to talk about. I mean the guy was a member of the Alaska Independence Party that was in favor of Alaska seceding from the Union (Is this not the same argument Palin just hollered out on the trail that when it was convenient for Obama to be connected with “these folk” that he was and then when it wasn’t he left–didn’t she kinda do the same thing?). Seriously folks, for all the stuff that Louis Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright and even William Ayers has said, none of them had went so far as to encourage their listeners to break away from the Union resulting in the birth of a nation known as the United States of Black America.
At this point, the American public needs to wake up to the reality that we’re being co-opted by idiocy. Yes, I mean it. We will see our own demise as a country because we fail to question ourselves. We have allowed incompetency to rule for the day and are not taught to question anything. Because of my boredom last night, I flipped past “Hannity’s America” to watch the drivel that he was selling for the evening. And somehow Hannity made the connection between Obama (who’s street is now blocked off, I’m not to happy about that! I used to use that street as a shortcut to my own house) and Minister Louis Farrakhan and William Ayers who all happen to live in the Hyde Park/Kenwood neighborhood by saying that in order for Obama to “move up in the ranks” he had to buy the house in this neighborhood.
But he fails to say that HPK is one of the more affluent neighborhoods in the city, that Farrakhan has been there at LEAST as long as I’ve been living, and that we’re the neighborhood where the University of Chicago is located–I mean damn, it’s just really the “it” spot of Chicago to live if you got money like that. I mean the way Hannity portrayed it, Hyde Park is a hotbed of “radicalist” thought. I guess since I was born and raised there, that means I’m a radical.
Do you all think I’m a radical?
It really incense me to no end. This type of speech from the GOP and from conservative media outlets in talk radio, print and television hearkens of the day when 1984 will become some sort of a reality. Aside from the dangerous policies allowed by Dick Cheney that are eroding the civil rights of “Joe Six pack and hockey moms across America” the conservative thought process still isn’t looking out for the little man and woman, but merely wanting to conserve the way things are in order to preserve their way of life.
I am categorically against the bombings that were done by the Weather Underground, but everytime I watch a clip from Jeremiah Wright I am reminded of the numerous atrocities that are done around the world in an attempt to preserve our way of life. Who said we as Americans had it right? Did we receive some mandate from God like the Israelites did in the book of Joshua to just go in and take over an already occupied land just because we didn’t agree with their religion?
We bomb places around the world without batting an eye.
That’s a fact; but it’s so radical no one wants to deal with it.
The problem with the brand of speech that is peddaled as an opiate for the masses by conservatives is that it’s not true. It’s only a lived reality for people who buy from them. For the rest of us who aren’t addicted to the cocaine-based, acid laced agenda, we’re made to feel like the bad guys and are forced to deal with another lived reality not having the luxury of being hyped up on the lies machinated by anti-intelligence.
I know for a fact that some Republicans or self-professed conservatives read this blog, or at least happen by occasionally. Seriously, what does William Ayers or Jeremiah Wright have to do with Sen. Barack Obama’s ability to deal with the economy? But the need to shift from clearly a problem we have in this country, (and for the first time I have heard this particular financial blip seriously compared with the Great Depression almost 80 year ago!) to something that McCain is more equipped at is the order of the day.
This is the America we live in now. One’s personality and character is thrown into question because they are the lesser of the two candidates. I mean, this is politics as usual. Nothing has changed much in my lifetime at least, but dammit, this has got to stop. This is just unconscienable. I mean, people are still saying that we don’t know Obama, they’re still trying to make him a Muslim, but at the same time link him with Trinity United Chuch of Christ, say he’s a terrorist with radical ideas–oh, yeah lemme park it right here.
What is considered radical in this country?
I am convinced that much of this is due to the latent racism still prevalent in this country. Notice I said latent and not blatant. I’m not convinced of the argument that the Conservatives are after Obama because “he’s a black man” but rather, it’s just always interesting to see how ideologies, philosophies and theologies are drawn by cultural distinctions. Well, nothing wrong with that on the surface–so people say. But if you go to the next level, one’s cultural distinctions are actually racial distinctions. Sure there are crossovers such as Fr. Michael Pfleger who’s as white as the day is long, but the simple fact that he preaches with a picture of a black Jesus behind him already makes him “black” in that existential way.
Seriously, all the people that are labeled “radical” by FoxNews and the McCain camp are all people who subscribe to ideologies that are very appealing to blacks in America (I still am reserving my endorsement of William Ayers because I think bombing places is anarchy. I mean what is really accomplished in that. However, I think Ayers since the 80’s has been a wonderful blessing to the liberal community of Chicago and his good has far outweighed his bad, in my opinion.)
My conclusion, in a roundabout way is that radicalism is anything that does not subscibe to a white, male, patriarchal worldview–whatever that may be at the time.
Yeah, I said it–now deal with that brand of truthful radicalism.
I welcome a PLETHORA of comments on this post. 🙂
Check out my other post
Keep it uppity and keep it truthfully radical, JLL
Joshua Lawrence Lazard 
I’ll give you this thought to chew on, Uppity. We already are in Orwellian times. Neoconservatives hijacked the word ‘conservative’ to camouflage their radical views, behavior, and war plans to make the New World Order possible.
Hey Uppity–wonderful post!
It is hard to have gone there, but I am so glad you did. It is uppity and radical to have gone there so eloquently in this post. Your take on the radical progressive agenda vs. the 1950s style conservative policy agenda is insightful. I am encouraged when young people have good reasons to take up righteously radical social justice issues.
The syntax of how you ‘had went there’ is radically jarring to hear–but definitely the analysis is on point. Keep writing radically uppity!
Kit makes an observant note–to right-wingers, Gov. Sarah Palin and her idiot sidekick, Sen. John McCain, are attempting a ‘radical’ revolution–backwards. Devolution?
Devolving to the fake ‘safety and security’ of a great white time. That mythical perfect time captured with the new technology (television and TV dinners) telecast predominately non-colored crooks, criminals, and crazies on the evening news scaring the hell out of children of all colors. ‘Birth of a Nation’ set the tone earlier by scaring the hell out of the white 1950s adults who willingly passed on scary negro-fear.
There is genuine nostalgia in certain quarters of our America the Beautiful for the ‘good old days’ of Archie Bunker mentality because only white privilege ruled the day.
While there have always been uppity negroes, none has ever managed to make it to the White House until now–and fear not, the white house will not turn black (whatever that means). ‘How-some-ever’, careless and cruel rhetoric on the part of the ‘unleashed pit-bull with the tattooed on lipstick’ and her doddering owner and clueless handlers should be careful with the dangerous words that froth out of uncircumcised lips.
Keeping it uppity and truthfully radical–thanks Uppity.
Thank goodness McCain and Palin are finally taking off the gloves. Like millions of Americans I’ve awaited the truth, while feeling frustration watching Obama get a free ride. Subjects like Wright, Farrakhan, Pfleger, Rezko, Ayers, and others, seem to have been off limits for discussion, when they go to the core of who Obama is. In defense of Obama, the media treats him like a sacred cow, and implies that since these subjects were visited at one time, they’re not fair game to revisit … but, why not? Like millions of Americans I’ve never been comfortable with Obama attending Jeremiah Wright’s church for TWENTY YEARS … suddenly quitting for political expediency, and then claiming that he never heard the racist, anti-American sermons going on there. Also, the Trintity church website has since sanitized it’s previous links on the ‘Black Values System’ … and, the ‘Black Liberation Theology’ which Obama sworn an oath to for TWENTY YEARS.
It’s scary to think that Obama could be associated with Middle East Terrorist. I cannot believe that so many people can be so hoodwinked by this guy.
He is such a virtual unknown. Everytime I read or hear something about him like this, it just makes me realize he is nothing but bad for our country. Yet,
he goes around telling everybody what they want to hear, pandering to their basic concerns, and exploiting fear. I just hope the American public gets
it right this time. Unlike the Liberal Media, who has done nothing but glorify him. We have a right to know his background, his upbringing, who he has
associated himself with over the course of his lifetime. People like Rezko, and Myers (a politico-radical who threatened to blow up the Pentagon and
the Capital buildings in D.C. back in the 60s) Or, how about Jeremiah Wright, his radical pastor, who is nothing more than a black-racist, country-bashing,
hate-mongerer? Who are Obama’s heores? Who are his running buddies? Who does he associate himself with? And why doesn’t the country, or at
least the FBI look into his background a little closer?
@Kevin and Howard
Okay, I hear your point. The question that I raise is that given your assumptions about Obama and the closeness of these relationships, what do you think will happen if Obama is elected as a result of these relationships?
Without sounding condescending, it appears to me that many people are operating on the fear that in some weird way that white folk will be subjugated to the same terrors and prejudices that blacks suffered under–not to mention, allow terrorists to come and bomb the US much like we do them.
I hope McCain keeps up the negative attacks they help Obama greatly. I expect John McCain will blow up tonight and show his true colors.