• The ResetEra Games of the Year Awards 2018 results are now live! Congratulations to all the winners!
  • Sidebar and Width settings will now no longer reset after 4 hours of inactivity! We have implemented a new system that will remember these preferences on each browser, for both members and guests. This allows you to choose different settings on different devices if you so desire.

French rapper investigated for call to 'hang white people'

YuYu

Banned
Member
Jun 18, 2018
1,240
Well maybe you should be questioning why you are so quick to give one video benefit of the doubt and pass it off as a joke but the other video doesn't process that way in your head.

Consistency. That's what grinds my gears. Most of the time because it's easy to see right through why some people aren't consistent. It's acting as if free speech or freedom of expression actually means "only freedom of speech or expression for me". Or for my tribe, however your tribalize yourself. Whether it's race or gender, the two most people use.

So it usually comes down to whenever it's a rowdy woman or POC bring politically incorrect, saying something off the cuff, telling a joke or invoking offensive language via song, film or even a game, mass panic and outrage. If it's a man, often white man, we go to benefit of the doubt, it was just a joke, it's art, it wasn't literal, etc, etc.

I'll be as consistent as an arrow and you know what people do tend to respect you better even if they disagree with you as long as you're being consistent. That shows honesty. Honesty is a fucking dying trait on the internet.
I'll repeat myself for the last time.One is OBVIOUSLY ment as a joke, one isn't.You have to ask yourself why you've been arguing with most people in this thread since the first page.Maybe they're right and you're wrong.You gotta consider that, mate.Anyway, I said what I had to say and I'm going out.Have a nice day.
 
Nov 16, 2017
5,763
Indeed. This guy seems to be an idiot who perhaps was trying to make a valid point about the treatment of black people and how people didn't and still don't care about that by swapping the races and surprise, people suddenly care, but nonetheless went too far and was a bit too much of a edgelord in the process and thus is rightly being investigated and if he indeed gets charged, I can't have any particular problem with that really and it's on him for being stupid and going too far and not handling the subject with the tact it deserves.

That all said, nonetheless it's very hard for me to disagree with this or what people like RedMercury have been bringing up in this thread, and I agree with this, 100% of the way for sure.

As a crystal clear example of the underlined in particular, I believe it was you (and apologize if it wasn't), but either way someone brought up the example of James Gunn and how that's treated versus how this has been treated. That's indeed a fine example. However, something else can't help to occur to me.

What that something is, is that even if this guy is indeed completely racist against white people, which I don't deny as a possibility and if that's indeed the case and what the investigation turns up (and in which case he deserves what he gets 100%), even in that situation it's nonetheless ALSO true that this nonetheless serves as a crystal clear example of white privilege (yeah, I'm going there, and stick with me for a 'sec 'cause this will all make sense in a moment even if doesn't now) in how people definitively, right off the bad, assume this nobody rapper is being completely 100% serious, completely 100% racist through and through right off the bat, and there's pages and pages to that effect and people being shocked that anyone could think anything other than the possibility that he's racist and the possibility that he's just angling for satire and just sucks at it and messed it up by being too much of an edgelord is taken off the table...


But yet when some, say, certain YouTuber makes a certain video about having a dog do Nazi salutes and responding to commands such as "gas the jews" suddenly right off the bat, it's completely different and the default assumption is apparently that Count Dancula was just tellin' jokes and shit and why should we take him serious and why does it matter anyway, since it's all just jokes, obviously. Like, even if this rapper guy is indeed a racist (and I don't deny that possibility--it's just not the only one and not one I'm going to jump to right off the bat here), I can't think of a better example of white privilege than when a white person makes a video about a dog being taught Nazi salutes/responding to commands like "gas the Jews" people just default to "oh, he's obviously just joking and what's the big deal and this is why the UK's hate speech laws are terrible and pointless, etc, etc, etc" but yet, but yet, when something like this happens when a nobody black rapper, that's when he's suddenly definitively serious and people are ready to lock him up and throw away the key already and don't give him anywhere near the same benefit of the doubt they gave to people like Count Danclua? That can't help but occur to me as I'm reading the thread and regardless of what is or isn't true about this guy, I still can't think of a better demonstration of white privilege than the discrepancy between these two threads all the same.

Of course, I forget myself and people might not be aware of what the Count Danclua/Nazi Dog video is about, since that was a bit ago now. For them, if that describes you, I direct you to threads such as this on that very subject that we had on this very site:
Man who taught dog Nazi salute found guilty of hate crime


Now, if you have the time, please take the time to read through that thread. Please take time to consider the tone of the responses and how most people are reacting to Dancula and their assumptions about him. Just look at how many people give him benefit of the doubt, how many people going with some variant of how he's clearly just joking or wondering what the big deal is, how many people in that thread talking about stuff like how terrible hate speech laws are or how that was proof that the UK is just wasting resources and wasting time. Then compare it to this one. Look at how many people here are definitively assuming this guy is racist, right off the bat, without allowing for even the slightest consideration of any other possibilities, whatsoever. Lots of possibilities were allowed to be considered for the Count Dankula thread. Where are those same ones here? Where's the difference? And why does that difference exist? Regardless of whether this particular man is a racist, that can't help but me by takeaway from comparing these threads: the different starting assumptions people seem to have about these two individuals and who's allowed to have benefit of the doubt, and who isn't. White privilege in action.

Like, if people still don't get what I'm talking about, I normally wouldn't do this, and I don't do this to call this particular poster out and apologize for any misgivings this may cause as that's not my intent (but I don't blame you if you don't believe me, but either way) but this is indeed a complex discussion where it can get very confusing about what people are or aren't saying, and it helps to have visual aids to get the point across. So that being the case, here are some posts from the Count Danclua thread linked above:





Now, same exact person, in this thread...


Now, like I said, I did not do this to call this particular poster out and hope people don't jump on that and can be respectful, but rather I did so to just point out the discrepancies between. Count Danclua's, while he was indeed a "dick" apparently nonetheless his stuff was clearly "just jokes" and it was a "sad day for the courts" and it should be the people that decide and all that in that case, whereas this, in this particular situation, this clearly ain't satire, this clearly ain't "jokes" but apparently this "is racism. Plain and simple" while "gassing the jews" is just jokes and fun and games apparently? Those kind of discrepancies can't help but stand out to be between these two threads and regardless of whether this guy is or is not a racist, he's also a nobody and whatever's going to happen to him and going to happen to him and nobody will care one way or the other at that point, so that being the case, that demonstration of white privilege shaping how people respond to these respective threads, in addition to stuff like what DigitalOp and RedMercury have brought up in this thread can't help but be my personal takeaways here.

Why did Count Danclua get so much benefit of the doubt? Why was his stuff just seen as jokes, right off the bat? Why is this guy immediately seen as racist? Why is even the slightest possibility that this guy's stuff is just satire, and that's he just terrible at it or whatever, equivalent to the logic used to defend Count Danclua so quickly dismissed with the same fervor people argued in favor of Danclua in that thread? Why is antisemitism seen as "just jokes" but when it's against white people, suddenly, definitively, it's racist right off the bat with no room for other possibilities whatsoever? It should surely be either both or neither, either way, people should at least be consistent in both cases right, so why the lack of consistency? Can't help but stick out to me.

So yeah, if people never have before, and have the time, I'd personally recommend to read both the Danclua thread and that one and think about such things and why people jump to the conclusions they do in each thread, who they give the benefit of the doubt and who they don't, because yeah, going through this one, I just couldn't help but have the threads on Danclua immediately pop up in my mind and the differences between the two topics and how they're treated is definitely enlightening to me personally, and unfortunately not in any positive ways at all.
Post of the thread ladies and gentlemen

Those receipts prove your point 100%. Excellent work
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,326
I'll repeat myself for the last time.One is OBVIOUSLY ment as a joke, one isn't.You have to ask yourself why you've been arguing with most people in this thread since the first page.Maybe they're right and you're wrong.You gotta consider that, mate.Anyway, I said what I had to say and I'm going out.Have a nice day.
Because this topic is full of the usual hypocrisy, lying, double standards and moral panics from people you see in other topics telling everyone why artistic freedom, freedom of speech/expression and offensive content are needed and shouldn't be a threat unless literal.

This video isn't literal. The artist has answered to the media what he attempted. It can be argued how offensive it is or if it failed to do what the artist intended, but the consistent cries online that this is a literal call to hang white people are as dishonest as it gets.
 
Oct 28, 2017
678
I've seen plenty of other artists brought up, but not sure if the brothers Necro and Ill Bill have been mentioned. Both have done horrorcore tracks. But those aren't taken as confessions of their crimes. It seems that there's a lot of people in Era who don't know much about music if they think this French dude is something new. Vote with your wallet, as we use to say.
Yeah, Necro is the first thing I thought about when I saw this thread.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,229
Audioboxer

There is a line between stuff Slayer does, Misfits, ToN etc and things that bands like Lanzer do. Where I’m actually glad government steps in.

On topic:

I don’t know the guy in the OP, but could easily see it as an failed attempt to get his point accors in a bad way/ poor use if words / intend.
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,326
Audioboxer

There is a line between stuff Slayer does, Misfits, ToN etc and things that bands like Lanzer do. Where I’m actually glad government steps in.

On topic:

I don’t know the guy in the OP, but could easily see it as an failed attempt to get his point accors in a bad way/ poor use if words / intend.
Lanzer are an actual Neo-Nazi band as far as I can see. That then provides the intent from the individuals because they are... literal Nazis. No issues there with them being dealt with.

I looked up Necro and Ill Bill, that escalated quickly :P

https://genius.com/Ill-bill-white-nigger-lyrics

https://genius.com/amp/Necro-white-slavery-lyrics

But a little bit of research and it becomes clear it is artistic and two artists simply pushing limits. I mean in regards to the first song

White N*gger deals with the stigma Bill felt of being white in a predominantly black community in the 80s. He also outlines some of the defining racist incidents he experienced growing up.

Bill have stated in interviews that he never performs this song live because he thinks the N-word is ugly and don’t want people in the crowd to sing it back at him and everybody else in the audience.
Doesn't mean you need to like or approve of either but it's the leap to when it becomes "We need to censor this and call the police" that gets me debating. As above if someone is a literal Nazi then yeah sure, that's a line for me.
 

Benita

Banned
Member
Aug 27, 2018
862
Imagine seeing this fucking video and deciding that your response is to quibble semantics over the use of the word racism.

Fuck outta here.

Shit is disgusting and anything other than condemnation in the strongest possible terms is suspect as hell.
 
Jan 11, 2018
301
Nah, thanks tho. If organic discussion upsets you maybe just don't post. People having a conversation over the meaning of the word racism doesn't preclude condemning the video.
Saying anyone deserves to be murdered because of the colour of thier skin especially babies should carry wide spread condemnation , if that level of thinking is void from your mind .. yeah it's suspect
 
Dec 24, 2017
5,143
Saying anyone deserves to be murdered because of the colour of thier skin especially babies should carry wide spread condemnation , if that level of thinking is void from your mind .. yeah it's suspect
Can you quote who said that? Who didn't condemn it?

You can agree he shouldn't have said to kill babies while still thinking he didn't need to be prosecuted.
 

iliketopaint_93

Use of alt account
Member
Sep 3, 2018
597
The art of modern satire is literally borne from dead baby jokes, so I don't see why that song couldn't be considered satire as well.

I'm not familiar enough with that rapper to know where he's coming from emotionally with those lyrics but I can't really be offended by them because the absurdity of how much thought he puts into the descriptions of the violence kinda pulled a laugh or two out of me, to be honest. Seems like it's clearly intended to be shock humor.

Whether or not those lyrics should be considered good or bad satire is probably a more productive debate than whether or not they should be considered too offensive to be expressed at all.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,258
There's an update

"Hang White People: Rapper Nick Conrad faces fine for YouTube song"



Prosecutors are calling for a suspended €5,000 (£4,520) fine for French rapper Nick Conrad, who is on trial for incitement to murder in Paris after he published an online video entitled "Hang White People".
The music video shows the rapper acting out the kidnap, torture and hanging of a white man.
The lyrics, which sparked outrage, call for white babies to be killed.
Mr Conrad denies the charge, and says the song is a comment on racism.
The nine-minute video, first published on YouTube in September, was quickly suspended for violating the company's terms of service.
It depicts a white man being shot and tortured by the rapper and an accomplice. He is forced to bite the pavement and is kicked in the head before being hanged.
One section of the lyrics reads: "I go to the nurseries, I kill the white babies. Catch them quick and hang their parents!"
Anti-racism groups have called the clip an incitement to violence and racial hatred.

Link

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46821421
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,326
The charge against Mr Conrad could result in up to five years in prison and €45,000 in fines. Prosecutors have requested a suspended fine of €5,000, saying he has "already to a certain extent paid the consequences".

The rapper told the court on Wednesday that the video was obviously a fictional depiction of racism, designed to shock by inverting roles, and therefore not to be taken at face value.

The scenes are said to be a reference to the film American History X, where white neo-Nazis subjected a black man to similar violent acts.

The BBC's Hugh Schofield reports that the prosecution countered this, saying there cannot be exceptions - incitement to violence does not stop just because the intended victim is white.
Fucking ridiculous. If humanity cannot parse a credible threat of incitement to violence from this then I can't even.

At worst for this you should say "I'm offended, oh well". Laugh and get on with your day.
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,326
Isn't this a small price to pay for Europeans to be able to criminalize all hate speech from real racists?
Not really. Common sense should prevail and be able to discern a credible threat from what at worst amounts to an offensive (failed) role reversal.

If YouTube want to kick it, guy gets sacked (if he's employed anywhere) and other private platforms/music label/whatever bail, fine. The Government should only intervene when incitement or a genuine threat can be established, then proven.

I guess you could say the courts look to prove this, but the courts are often fucking stupid around the internet and offensive shit. Saying or creating media of whatever you want always has consequences, mostly social/reputation/judgement of character. I advocate and will always advocate for Government intervention being marginalized to very few instances of speech violations.

This is not one of these.