Why, white man? WHY

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by Joro, Mar 8, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    What we have here is a failure to communicate...

    I should have clarified; Or perhaps I clarified too much, and as a result ended up saying something I didn't intend to actually say. In any case, what I meant was that because culture and art form have no objective material existence (that is, they are conceptual), they cannot be kept or transferred in an economic sense: Bought, sold, or owned.

    Just a side note: Ibises are not owls.

    You are on the right track, though. The ancient Greeks did appropriate many deity-forms and myths from the Egyptians, and adopted those ideas into their own mythos, as did the Romans from the Greeks much later. This isn't stealing, because the Egyptians couldn't "own" concepts. In merely exposing Greeks to their myths and forms of religion, the Egyptians essentially freely and voluntarily gave away these concepts, which the Greeks could accept or throw into the trash-bin of history.

    To draw a modern parallel from this, African Americans do not (and never did) "own" hip hop, because hip hop is an idea, a concept; In exposing other groups of people to this art form and culture, they freely gave away the idea of hip hop (losing nothing in the process). This idea was then possessed by everyone exposed to it, to be accepted or discarded. Some chose to incorporate the concept of hip hop into their own lives, others chose to discard it.

    What this is ultimately about is intellectual property. I assert that there is no such thing as intellectual property. In this sense, another related parallel is computer software, or digital music files.

    I'll simplify the matter for purposes of explanation. Suppose I buy a compact disc from a store. The ideas (concepts) on the CD were originally the artists, which upon recording to a medium then became the property of the recording studio. Not the idea itself, but the actual physical medium of the recording became the studio's property. This medium was then sold to a distributor, who sold it to a music store, who then sold the medium (the CD) to me. I now am the exclusive and sole owner of this particular individual copy of the CD.

    However, while I bought the medium on which an idea (concept, data) is contained, the idea itself is freely given, just as freely as if I had heard the musician performing in the subway. Through the use of my personal labor and resources, I might have the capability of producing copies of the idea (freely given) contained on the medium I own (the CD I bought) and transferring this idea either directly to other individuals (for free or for a fee) or onto another medium (other blank CD's that I also own.)

    In doing so, no one has lost anything to which they have an actual property right in. The original artist still has the idea of the songs in their head; They've lost nothing. The recording studio still has the idea of the songs recorded on a master copy of the CD; They've lost nothing. The distributor and music store still have the copies of the CD that they have not transferred property right to through sale; They've lost nothing.

    All that can be said to be "lost" are potential sales of additional copies of the CD, but no one can claim any property right in potential sales. No one can own property in the will of people who MIGHT buy their product.

    So, what have I done in making copies of a CD and distributing it (either for free or for a mutually agreed upon price)? I've simply used my labor and resources upon a commodity that I own sole rights to (in this case, the CD ceases to be a consumer good and becomes a capital good) to engage in free competition with others upon the market.

    This post may seem to have veered drastically off-topic, but I think it will be self-evident to the informed reader how the concept of intellectual property relates to the free transference of concepts in general, and culture in specific.

    Sorry for the previous confusion and inconsistency in my argument. In my effort to be precise and clear, I muddied the waters more.
    test
  2. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    In summation, only the "container" for an idea (CD, DVD, books, etc.) can be bought or sold. The idea itself is given away just as freely as if I had listened to the music or watched the movie or read the book at a friend's house.
    test
  3. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    Of course, NONE OF THIS speaks to whether it is acceptable (or even possible) for "white people" to disparage "black people" and simultaneously "love (the culture / art form) hip hop."

    I suppose that it is possible, but highly unlikely that someone could genuinely and sincerely love the culture and art form of hip hop and simultaneously hate the entire (or large segments thereof) group of people who originated the concept.

    A small anecdote: In the town I grew up in, I personally witnessed several people who sincerely hated black people, but claimed to love hip hop. I was dumbfounded by this then, and I'm not much less confused by the apparent contradiction now. Of course, it calls into serious doubt the sincerity of their claim to "love hip hop." But, on the whole, there's not enough there for me to conclusively make the claim that it is entirely out of the realm of possibility that these two apparently contradictory ideas could genuinely coincide.

    Assuming that it is at least remotely possible, there is the question of whether it is acceptable. This depends entirely upon ones' definition of "acceptable." Is racism "acceptable" in general? What does "acceptable" mean in this context? Racism of course exists. I "accept" that it exists, and likely always will exist. I do not share these views, and I will not (and realistically cannot) tell someone else that they are forbidden from holding (or expressing) such views, but I "accept" that some people are racist. Nevertheless, I find it repugnant. Is that acceptance? If not, what is?

    Before we can have this kind of discussion, we need to agree on the definitions of terms. So, how would you define "acceptance," or "acceptable," in terms of the views of people who claim to "love hip hop, but hate black people."?
    test
  4. Bar nigga

    Bar nigga 314 STL Ancient of daze..

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    2,463
    u negros type to much
    test
  5. Dex Lewis

    Dex Lewis Guest

    What up, bar.
    test
  6. SIZZLA

    SIZZLA New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 1999
    Messages:
    7,907
    :screwy:
    why cant a people and not a person own an artform? in fact, many artforms carry the peoples name within it eaithr direct or indirectly. polish people do the polka... arabs listen to arabic music... go to the yard for reggae... afro latino music and dance. see? and hip-hop is afrikan american... food is the same way son. ita cultural.
    test
  7. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    Concepts and ideas cannot be owned, for reasons that I've shown above. Art forms (and certain recipes for food) and culture may have had their origins in a certain group of individuals, but insofar (and as soon) as another group of individuals has been exposed to the idea, it has been given away, although nothing is lost in the giving (in much the same way that if I send copies of an .mp3 to 50 people, I've not actually lost anything in the process, even though 50 more people now have the .mp3)
    test
  8. Dex Lewis

    Dex Lewis Guest

    Yeah. I tried to make this point like a year ago. Ideas/concepts being immaterial elements with no ownership.

    Niggas don't want to listen to anything here unless it promotes their sense of victimhood.
    test
  9. Joro

    Joro New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    5,054
    That's what this thread is about. That is the contradiction I wanted an answer to from the whiteboys on this site.

    You at first tried to defend them. I knew where you were trying to go: "Hiphop, as it is today, is neither 'black' nor 'white', so there is no contradiction in these whiteboys' attitude." ...And now we're involved in this semantic mess of "intellectual property".

    But, as seen in your quote above, what common sense you do have tells you there is a contradiction.

    Here, again, is my attempt to explain the contradiction. (You or Dex Lewis or any other "conquering caucasian", if you take issue with my explaination, can in turn explain yourselves to me, so that I could understand the love/hate attitude you have for us "poor blackfolk", the "perpetual victims.")



    You cannot have an understanding of hiphop, and a love for it born out of that understanding - as these whiteboys on here claim to - and disparage blackness.

    Either

    1) You are a liar, in hiphop just to infiltrate your enemy, or

    2) You are a conflicted whiteboy, struggling to come to terms with your whiteness.

    or 3) You don't understand hiphop. You only think it's "cool" because you're titallated by the sex and violence.
    test
  10. Dex Lewis

    Dex Lewis Guest

    Another useless reply.
    test
  11. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    Non sequitur and straw man. You're drawing a conclusion that does not follow from the premise, and you're attempting to attribute a position to my argument that I have not taken, and proceed to argue against the position that is not mine; I have never claimed that there was no contradiction in their attitudes, that was your own fallacious conclusion. I have not attempted in this thread to defend the positions of any individual other than myself.
    test
  12. Wonka

    Wonka OTBVA 2v2 Champ

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2008
    Messages:
    6,868
    test
  13. SIZZLA

    SIZZLA New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 1999
    Messages:
    7,907
    people are material, so, they should be owned? come on now... Crackaz always lookin to justify robbery! look, Italian food is Italian! Roman theology belongs to rome! a peoples culture is an extension of them! i am watching a piece on the travel channel now about reggae music how it belongs to Jamaicans! how it evolved from Africa to anti-slavery resistance to the downpression of all forms of oppression... i'm no victim, nor will i be. if i allowed people to take whats mine, then i would be. Greco/Roman euro gentiles have been stealing culture for so long, they have nothin thats original... they live to rob and steal! they know nothin else and see it as normal... sad. be original B! not a eternal copy cat. culture son. every people has had one with their own expressions. their own art forms. a person from alaska can not claim a practice from the congo... a bee dont want to be an ant... do you. express yoself!
    test
  14. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    Yes. Every individual has an inalienable, non-transferable property in their own person. We own ourselves.

    No. I never make an attempt to rationalize the use of aggressive force against the property of others. Theft is theft. But, to be theft, something must actually then be DEPRIVED from someone.

    Italian food as we know it can properly be said to have originated in Italy, but insofar as the once secret recipes have been revealed, they can be said to be "owned" by everyone who knows them and embraces them.

    Originated in Rome.

    Originated in Jamaica, but does not belong to Jamaicans insofar as others possess ideas about the concept reggae.

    And why not?

    I've already shown why "outsiders" accepting cultural concepts of others as their own does not deprive the original holders of the idea of anything.

    If you have an idea in your head, that 2 + 2 = 4, and I don't have that idea, you can be said to own the idea, where I do not. The only reason for this is that the idea is inside your head, but not in mine. Obviously I could find the idea that 2 + 2 = 4 virtually anywhere, but for the sake of argument, I'm getting it from you.

    As soon as you say to me 2 + 2 = 4, and I understand what that means, I now own the idea as well, but you have not been deprived of the knowledge of 2 + 2 = 4. I cannot steal from you the idea, because you cannot be made to be deprived of the knowledge.
    test
  15. SIZZLA

    SIZZLA New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 1999
    Messages:
    7,907

    ok mr we are the world... the crips have shared their ways with us... go join up with a set tonight... and since its yours like its his, you wear red ahite? then, while you at it, go join up with Ben Ladin and his crew over in the hills of some asian country. your jus so welcome to do so!!! i hope i sound as stupid as you do. but seriously, 9s that your best try? if so, you failed real hard to get me to understand jus how this thing works... in otha words, how to practice another person or persons culture and/or rituals and it just be accepted. i want to see you get that off! sure, in a perfect world, your thesis sounds more than fair... but here in the real world, you have to pay your dues. even then, one has to satisfy many prerequisites. what you are doing is giving some petty argument in some lame attempt to write yoself and others like you into our cukture. yes, we have shared all that we have. nevertheless, not to create the idea in the minds of others that what we share is not sacrid unto us. not so that people like yourself can allow your ego to decieve you into thinking that its some cultural free for all! there are many reasons as to why it is just impossible to just embrace another mans culture and make it your own on the basis of him being open to you and sharing it with you. sorry charlie, it does not make it equally yours (you have your own!) ! thats rude and selfish to attempt to seperate a people and their culture and the expressions that go along with the said culture and on top of that, to impose your will and/or write yourself in as an equal! people live, die, dedicate their lives and the lives of their entire families to principals and concepts- precepts that bonds them to others who came prior to and who will follow them on into eternity. it is each of our right as it is also our priviledge to do so. to discuss and/or cellibrate the people & the acts that connnect us to them young or old living or dead. so, you see, everywhere that there are people, they have a story. respect to each and every one of them-one and all!
    test
  16. Joro

    Joro New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    5,054
    SIZZLA just dropped a BOMB. TRUTH powerful enough to explode assumptions, attitudes, insidiously woven webs of semantics, and even facetious arguments.

    I should just leave this thread as is. Maybe I'll repost Sizzla in paragraphs, adding emphases, with italics and bold, to help those who obviously can't read the meanings of their OWN posts (I'm Not refering to you SIZZLA).

    SIZZLA: I thank you for blessing the thread with common sense. Your post on the whole was beautiful. You were even magnanimous enough to express to these modern-day Greeks that they have a worthwhile culture of their own, that every man does, and that you respect them all.

    But your first sentence was classic:

    The Crips have shared their ways with us...go join up with a set tonight...and since it's yours like it's his, you wear RED, ahite?
    test
  17. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    Carriage return, motherfucker! Do you speak it?

    I'm not sure what a cukture is, but I've never claimed to be making any attempt to write myself or anyone else into it. Whenever you're done casting aspersions and creating straw man fallacies, I challenge you to show where I have done any such thing.

    I must give credit where it is due, you have mastered the skill of stringing maximal words together and saying absolutely fucking nothing.
    test
  18. Joro

    Joro New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    5,054
    Here Volaticus, I'll take the soul out of SIZZLA's writting and marshal it, making it ridged and easier for white people to understand. Read it, then reply, it possible.

    [BTW, LOL @ you frustrated by no carriage RETURN. You're the type of thinker who could argue a proposition if it's presented as (x,y,z) but not if presented (A,B,C)]

    Before I start, a clarification: The *Crips* are described by the police as a street-gang, but what they really are is a counterculture. And they always wear Blue

    Originally posted by SIZZLA:

    "Ok Mr."We Are The World": the Crips have shared their ways with us - go join up with a set tonight. And since it's yours like its his, you wear red ahite?

    Then, while you're at it, go join up with Ben Ladin and his crew over in the hills of some asian country. You're just so welcome to do so!

    I hope i sound as stupid as you do. But seriously, is that your best try? If so, you failed real hard to get me to understand just how this thing works. In other words, how to practice another person's or people's culture and/or rituals and it have just be accepted. I want to see you pull that off!

    Sure, in a perfect world, your thesis sounds more than fair. But here in the real world, you have to pay your dues. Even then, one has to satisfy many prerequisites. What you are doing is giving some petty argument in some lame attempt to write yourself and others like you into our culture.

    Yes, we have shared all that we have. We have NOT done it, however, to create the idea in the minds of the others with whom we are sharing that what we are sharing is not sacred unto us. Not so that people like yourself can allow your ego to deceive you into thinking that its some cultural free for all!

    There are many reasons as to why it is just impossible to simply embrace another mans culture and make it your own on the basis of him being open to you and sharing it with you. Sorry Charlie, that does not make it equally yours (you have your own!) It is rude and selfish to attempt to seperate a people from their culture, and the expressions that go along with the said culture, and on top of that, to impose your will and/or write yourself in as an equal!

    People live, die, dedicate their lives and the lives of their entire families to principals and concepts- precepts that bond them to the others who came prior to them and to the others who will follow them on into eternity. It is each [*each* meaning everyone, black/white/whatever] ...it is each of our right as it is also our privilege to do so - to discuss and/or celebrate the people & the acts that connect us to them: young or old, living or dead.

    So, you see, everywhere that there are people, they have a story. respect to each and every one of them!"
    *********

    Anyone got anything say?
    test
  19. Bar nigga

    Bar nigga 314 STL Ancient of daze..

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    2,463
    ya'll niggaz talk to much
    test
  20. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    Words words words; None of which refute the points that I have made.

    The police are just as much a street-gang, and they wear the same colors. I'm really not interested in joining a gang, nor am I interested in joining an Islamofascist terrorist organization.

    Whether a group whose ideas an individual has embraced actually accepts that individual into their organization or not is irrelevant to the discussion of the transference of those ideas.
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)