Thursday, June 16, 2011

Lupe Fiasco Crossroads: Part I Terrorism


Lupe Fiasco Crossroads: Part I Terrorism

I am at a cross roads with Lupe Fiasco which is an improvement from how I felt about him directly after reading a couple of his quotes. After several discussions with some friends, my thoughts have mellowed out a bit. He stands by what he believes in action and through his music. In investigating a little further, he not only talks about what we can do that’s better for our community but he actually does it. Artist do and say many things that I do not agree with and his two quotes below aggravate me to no end, and I am not sure how to reconcile my views below with all the good that he does.

“In my fight against terrorism, to me, the biggest terrorist is Obama, in the United States of America,” Fiasco said. “For me, I’m trying to fight the terrorism that’s actually causing the other forms of terrorism. The root causes of the terrorism is the stuff that the U.S. government allows to happen and the foreign policies that we have in place in different countries that inspire people to become terrorists. And it’s easy for us because it’s really just some oil, which we can really get on our own.” –Lupe Fiasco

First of all, to say that people are forced into terrorism by circumstances is beyond crap that I do not even know where to begin. I understand that there may be a compulsion to follow our baser nature and look to violence to solve our problems but why should that be acceptable by any account. The logistics, financial funding, operational effort, and inspiration/motivation that are required for a terrorist attack can be funneled through other channels that do not require mass casualty resulting in the injection of fear. Since when is it okay to stoop down to the level of one’s oppressor in order to rise above it. There is no excuse and no inspiration for terrorism except a base need to seek out revenge by instilling fear and pain which does not result in a better situation for the cause that terrorists are supposedly fighting for.

Now, I understand that the US has to take responsibility for it’s role in perpetuating the situation or climate that would invoke the want for revenge. I am wondering if his stance is in an attempt to highlight that point. Okay, our foreign policy sucks, but there has to be a better way to address than issue than making blanket, inflammatory statements that most people would not investigate any further.
Post a Comment