More Underclass/Hip-Hop Barbarism on Parade

[_Kevin Graham]

[_Droopy]

Not sure whether this is true or not, but the Bruce Lee Movie, "Dragon" explained that it was Lee who was slated to play the main character in the upcoming "Kung Fu" series, but they chose David Carradine because he looked less Asian.

What's known is that Bruce Lee was passed over for the role for the not especially Chinese looking David Carradine, leading to many hilariously ridiculous slow-motion Kung Fu battles. I mentioned it in my post. There's decent evidence the original pitch for Kung Fu came from Bruce Lee in the first place. That's where Dragon gets its story from.

You might also recall that this was in...1972. In that same year, Five Fingers of Death hit the screens, followed by Fist of Fury (The Chinese Connection), The Chinese Connection (Fist of Fury), and many other HK martial arts films that began an all out fad in the United States centered in foreign movies populated solely by...Asians.

The next major entry, at around the same time was Shinichi (Sonny) Chiba, in his Streetfighter films. All of these films were wildly popular (as Asian martial arts at that time boomed in popularity in America), despite what a few suits at one major network may have thought or assumed.

None of your rubbery, ideology bloated theoretical speculations upon the racist nature of Hollywood in the late 20th century, or of the general population in the same time period, holds up to a deeper probing of what was actually going on in the popular media culture of the time.

On a number of counts.

[_Droopy]

As with Cam, retreat to adolescence is probably your only alternative, at this point.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

How Droopy views welfare:

[_EAllusion]

You might also recall that this was in...1972.

...

If by "wildly popular" you mean "found a sustaining niche genre market" then yes. That doesn't change the fact that Lee was passed over for the role of a Chinese immigrant warrior for a white guy whose fighting style resembled trying to find the light switch in the dark while on valium. This almost certainly happened because of a racist calculation of what American TV viewers would consume, though even if that wasn't the case it would still reflect latent racism. It's not like it was a period where an actor looking like Lee would be given the lead in a Victorian costume drama even though a Carradine could get the lead as a Chinese immigrant. That's the sole point being made in what you are quoting, which you don't refute so much as ignore. You seem to think that if you can point to examples of successful racial minorities in film, this erases the existence of any simultaneous issues with how race is treated in film. That reeks of tokenism in your mindset and is false in any case.

[Guest]

If by "wildly popular" you mean "found a sustaining niche genre market" then yes. That doesn't change the fact that Lee was passed over for the role of a Chinese immigrant warrior for a white guy whose fighting style resembled trying to find the light switch in the dark while on valium. This almost certainly happened because of a racist calculation of what American TV viewers would consume, though even if that wasn't the case it would still reflect latent racism. It's not like it was a period where an actor looking like Lee would be given the lead in a Victorian costume drama even though a Carradine could get the lead as a Chinese immigrant. That's the sole point being made in what you are quoting, which you don't refute so much as ignore. You seem to think that if you can point to examples of successful racial minorities in film, this erases the existence of any simultaneous issues with how race is treated in film. That reeks of tokenism in your mindset and is false in any case.

This is obviously utterly hopeless as you're so completely immersed in your baroque armchair cultural Marxism-basted theories of the nature of society that a philosophically serious debate with you is out of the question.

Look back at virtually every response you've made to me in these threads and you will find nary a single rational, carefully reasoned, logically connected body of argument among any of them. The vast majority of what you've done thus far, in your haughty, dismissive, pseudo-sophisticated way, is call names and poison as many wells as you can so that you never really have to enter the arena of ideas at all and defend your philosophy intellectually.

Tokenism? White racism (empirically and within the last several decades, the least visible, tolerated, or influential form of racism within an American context) under every bed and around every corner? Every movie holding deep Freudianesque symbolism centered in white racial consciousness and the need for racial homogeneity?

You're no libertarian, D. You're a signed, sealed, and delivered contemporary elitist left-wing intellectual who has, for all intents, swallowed a substantial portion of the cultural Marxist/multiculuralist/critical theory Kool-Aid without even pausing to take a breath. You're probably not even really aware of the philosophical genealogy of very much of the theoretical framework you bring to this discussion and its particular subject matter, but I am. You can find most of it in any black studies, post-colonial studies, American studies, ethnic studies, or multiculturalism-themed college/university classroom or textbook in the nation. Its all of a piece, and it is, for the most part, not serious sociocultural criticism or observation, but ideology.

Your self-satisfied smugness is, as is usually the case with such as yourself, manifest in direct proportion to the philosophical shallowness and magniloquent, unctuous moral priggishness you bring to any such discussion. Its all very anti-intellectual and off-putting in form and style, but as long as people like you and Beastie and Cam and Kevin think you can win arguments by default in this manner, you will doubtless continue to meet your ideological opponents in this way. Its worked for the Left quite well since the late sixties, and it will continue to work so long as our society tolerates it and does not eventually call it out for what it is.

I notice that neither you, Beastie, Cam, or anyone else here has dared touch Thomas Chatterton William's book or interview, and won't so much as comment on the McWhorter piece, the Walter Williams piece, or on anything written by Sowell et al.

I also know why this is the case, and so, I think, do you.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

This guy?

http://uppitynegronetwork.com/tag/uppit ... hilosophy/

- Doc

[_Droopy]

This guy?

http://uppitynegronetwork.com/tag/uppit ... hilosophy/

- Doc

Why are you incapable of making your own arguments, articulating your own perceptions and perspectives, in your own words, and insist on sending people to the essays of others on a mission of sifting and picking out the main, salient themes of an essay in the hope that they will be the ones you have focused on and seen as relevant?

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE WILLIAMS BOOK?

[_EAllusion]

This is obviously utterly hopeless

Sure, that explains why you don't engage my arguments or the evidence backing them up.

The vast majority of what you done thus far, in your haughty, dismissive, pseudo-sophisticaed way, is call names and poison as many wells as you can so that you never really have to enter the arena of ideas at all and defend your philosophy intellectually.

Your self-satisfied smugness is, as is usually the case with such as yourself, manifest in direct proportion to the philosophical shallowness and magniloquent, unctuous moral priggishness you bring to any such discussion. Its all very anti-intellectual and off-putting in form and style

Why are you incapable of making your own arguments, articulating your own perceptions and perspectives, in your own words, and insist on sending people to the essays of others on a mission of sifting and picking out the main, salient themes of an essay in the hope that they will be the ones you have focused on and seen as relevant?

Do you read your own posts? Like, at all? Possibly when you are mentally composing them? I feel like I'm getting caught up in an especially bizarre exercise in self-hate you are working out with yourself.