Rebelistic Quotes from the 20th Century | feat Bob Marley, Nina Simone, Nikki Giovanni, Josephine Baker & more

Rebelistic Quotes

Different people rebel against different things. Some choose to stand up and sacrifice their lives for different causes. Given the time period, the demographics, the upbringing, a person’s passion can become apart of their legacy.  The following, features some prominent figures and their passions that manifested and inspired movements. These quotes also manage to reveal the rebel within them as well in the most settle and robust ways. The rebellions, whether large or small can be considered a part of culture that was expressed in a very necessary way to approach sensitive subjects ranging from unification,  equality, desegregation, anti-oppression, or just simply F R E E D O M.

Though these quotes come from a wide variety of time slots in the 20th century from an array of celebratory figures of different backgrounds and origins such as entertainers, writers, poets , their mantra is still relevant and resounds loudly in today’s global environment.

Bob Marley

“I’m a rebel, soul rebel
I’m a capturer, soul adventurer
Do you hear me
I’m a rebel, rebel in the morning
Soul rebel, rebel at midday time”

“Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery.
None but ourselves can free our minds.”
― Bob Marley

“The truth is, everyone is going to hurt you. You just got to find the ones worth suffering for.”
― Bob Marley

“Who are you to judge the life I live?
I know I’m not perfect
-and I don’t live to be-
but before you start pointing fingers…
make sure you hands are clean!”
― Bob Marley

“The good times of today are the sad thoughts of tomorrow.”
― Bob Marley

Nina Simone

Photo Courtesy: Violentsuccess.com

“I’m a real rebel with a cause.”
-Nina Simone

“You’ve got to learn to leave the table
When love’s no longer being served”.”
― Nina Simone

“There’s no excuse for the young people not knowing who the heroes and heroines are or were.”
-Nina Simone

People, let a lone, musicians don’t exist like these two any more. Bob Marley inspired generations of people with his music and activism for black unification and Nina Simone was an artist that challenged the status quo of beauty through her music. These are self-proclaimed rebels that lived and died for a cause in the hopes the leave an impression and change the world. Entrenched in their ancestral roots, they understood their present day, prayed for a better future and put their soul into their artistry.

Maya Angelou

Photo Courtesy: Dorkmuffin.com

“I can be changed by what happens to me. But I refuse to be reduced by it.”
― Maya Angelou

“Success is liking yourself, liking what you do, and liking how you do it.”
― Maya Angelou

“Everything in the universe has a rhythm, everything dances. ”
― Maya Angelou

“Courage: the most important of all the virtues because without courage, you can’t practice any other virtue consistently.”
― Maya Angelou

Nikki Giovanni

Photo Courtesy: Ironboardcollective.wordpress.com

“Mistakes are a fact of life: It is the response to the error that counts.”
― Nikki Giovanni
“Deal with yourself as an individual, worthy of respect and make everyone else deal with you the same way.”
― Nikki Giovanni
“Black love is black wealth”
― Nikki Giovanni

James Baldwin

Photo Courtesy: Blackhistorynow.com

“True rebels after all, are as rare as true lovers,and in both cases, to mistake a fever for passion can destroy one’s life” — James Baldwin

“Love does not begin and end the way we seem to think it does. Love is a battle, love is a war; love is a growing up.”
— James Baldwin

“Perhaps home is not a place but simply an irrevocable condition.”
— James Baldwin

“You think your pain and your heartbreak are unprecedented in the history of the world, but then you read.”
— James Baldwin

Unforgettable poets and unparalleled literary figures, these three are unmatched in many layers of their being. With both Maya Angelou and Nikki Giovanni still among us, they shed life on black life and black survival that many simply ignore and continue their activism and writing today. James Baldwin was unique in his approaches to sexuality and religion and the black race as a whole. These three artists are definitely Rebels in multifaceted ways.

Pages: 1 2

The State of Florida v George Zimmerman: What is this case REALLY about?

The State of Florida v George Zimmerman: What is this case REALLY about?

The idea of George Zimmerman v. Trayvon Martin is a microcosm into major injustices in the American system, and some can even go as far as to say this is a global issue. This is a global issue of class, privilege, race, resources, justice and an array of many other things ranging from the fear of black men, gun control, the prison industrial complex as well as the media industrial complex.

It is a major problem when a grown man can shoot and kill a child and not get arrested for 45 days. I cannot imagine someone killing someone (whether it was accidental or intentional) be questioned by the police, and be sent home to go to bed in the same night without a thorough investigation or toxicology test.  Instead the teenager who lost his life was tested… Really? Why? Is this justice? Not many of us can imagine someone we know in a realistic scenario that would even similarly render those circumstances.

The national attention this case received is because of those circumstances. Race was always a factor. However, because the circumstances was just that, there would have been an outcry just the same if a grown black man shot and killed a white teenager in the dark in Florida and got questioned and sent home by the police in the same night.

But that scenario is practically impossible to fathom.

Over those 45 days while 17year old Trayvon Martin’s family and loved ones had buried him and mourned the outcry grew louder. It was over those 45 days the intensity grew and passions got stronger and then we realized the issues of privilege and class were going to be put up against one another. Over those 45 days Zimmerman was able to do interviews with Sean Hannity on Fox News and raise enough money to help out with his legal fees and more. In fact he was able to raise more than the Martin family, the family that actually lost their son. According to HLNtv.com as of August 2012 Zimmerman had raised more than $250,000.  In May 2012, according to metro.us the Martin family had only raised half that amount through charities and the Trayvon Martin Foundation. The Martin family has since settled in a wrongful death suit filed against the homeowners association of the sub division where Martin was killed, according to the Huffington Post.

This case is unique and actually negates to show the dominate part of the American legal system where typically, a case does not reach trial. Actually more people plead to a charge and only go to a court room to hear their penalties. According to Danny Well truth-org Nov 2012, “More than 90 percent of ALL criminal charges are resolved through plea bargains.” This is where issues of privilege and resources come in to play. Had this circumstances been reversed with a black man on trial, (or anyone not in the upper class of the status quo) more than likely he wouldn’t have been able to raise the funds necessary for a substantially expensive legal team.

Now that the case has reached trial the focus has shifted from the initial issues and have gone to the right to self defense and who was the aggressor. It seems the message exuding from George Zimmermans defense is; you should fear black men, especially in the dark. With one of his witnesses taking the stand to testify her home in the same neighborhood was burgarlarized months prior to the incident in question, by young black men, one would think her message to the jury was you should fear black men, because they are scary.

Its a psychology that not only exist starkly here in America but all over the world. The fear and intimidation of the black man is real. The fact that so many of them lose their lives and are incarcerated each year due to both violent and non violent crimes can attest to that. Ask a black man you know if he has ever been in a situation when he was unnecessarily feared.

We all sit here with our eyes glued wide shut to this trial being aired live on news channels with the majority of its resources thoroughly covering the case. Infact one could argue the media’s coverage is more thorough than the overall police’s investigation of the case.

The age of information and technology is mutually exclusive with sensationalism. The “#ZIMMERMANTRIAL” has silenced and dimmed a lot of the other major headlines that has been in the news such as issues with the voting rights act, food stamps being separated from the farm bill for the first time in 40 years, as well as the increase on interest rates on college student loans.  What is so fascinating about the zealous media coverage in this case, is the argument about gun control has mysteriously escaped it.

Somehow the gun control argument has been completely nonexistent in this case and it is puzzling. Is it because he was “legally” carrying his gun? Oh, George Zimmerman was a responsible gun owner. No. Clearly he was not. Its difficult for a person to comprehend the fact a young child cannot go to the store for a snack run at night and not make it back home and their is no accountability for that. Trayvon isn’t the first or last young person of colour we are going to lose to gun violence however we can continue to try to make a difference in our communities.

Now we await the verdict and will someway feel either vindicated, defeated or even confused.

Justice for Trayvon!!!!!

May he sleep in peace 

Martin Luther King Jr and Socrates Were Similar???

C. D. Phillips

Political Issues and Ideas

March 2013

Justice for MLK and Socrates  

  

Justice involves the principal of fairness and equality. Justice also articulates that punishments should be proportionate to the action at hand. Martin Luther King Jr. and Socrates historically have similarities in how they guided their actions according to justice. Both have had opposing sides that too claim justice to their guidance such as segregationists, moderate Christians, Euthypro and Meletus.  In King’s well-known “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” and “The Trial and Death of Socrates, The Apology”, there are similar themes in their approaches to justice as well as themes that touch upon issues such as power imbalance, the relationship between freedom and power, doing what is right ethically and justly and using freedom to do so even in a limited society. In these themes, both King and Socrates critique religion, society, and politics all for the betterment of the nation. Coincidently, their counterparts too believe they are just and are aiming for the nation’s overall improvement. However, it is the division amongst groups and creating the concept of otherness that the segregationists, moderate Christians, Meletus and Euthyphro use to justify their views which overall differs from King and Socrates approaches.  Both of their responses to their injustices were based on non violent civil disobedience. Correspondingly, the idea of the “universal” is portrayed by both King and Socrates which promotes inclusivity which the antagonists in both situations are promoting exclusivity and separation. Creating an oppressor and an oppressed group doesn’t help build society it only obstructs it. That is the substantial difference in the two opposing approaches to justice. Both sides can argue they are just in their beliefs and actions but justice does not divide and hinder society’s potential and that is the significance. Justice emphasizes having a proportionate reaction to the action at hand. Euthypro’s desired punishment for Socrates was not proportionate to the alleged crime. Segregation based on race is already fundamentally wrong because race is not an option nor is there anything one can do to change their race. Segregating society based on race is not a proportionate response to the action at hand, which is simply existence.

            Both Socrates and King challenged their societies to not only hear what they are saying but to essentially listen to their message. Though both were perceived as radical and extreme figures, their radical thoughts were necessary. They both were being wrongfully accused, and both reversed their accusations onto their accusers which distinguished between the true and false conception of justice.  For example in “The Apology”, Socrates criticizes the Athenian society for their complacent behavior and assuming the politicians and others alike were automatically credible with society’s best interest at heart. He simultaneously questions those that claim to be obnoxiously wise that need not learn from others. He denies corrupting the youth and being an atheist and argues that his existence is necessary for Athens’s progression because he inspires and promotes critical thinking, self reflection and self evaluation. He too argues that his perception of the gods is not an atheist perspective but a necessary outlook. “Either I do not corrupt the young, or, if I do it is unwillingly, and you are lying in either case. Now if I corrupt them unwillingly, the law does not require you to bring people to the court for such wrongdoings…” (Plato, 26a)  “Do I not believe, as in other men do, that the sun and the moon are gods? – No, by Zues, gentlemen of the jury, for he says that the sun is stone and the moon earth”. (Plato, 26d) In 33d-e, Socrates continues to say if Meletus’s accusations are is true, his colleagues, protégés and their respective families wouldn’t be present at the trial supporting him, rather,  testifying against him.  King states he is in Birmingham not only for the business affiliations and invitation he received, but he is also there because injustice is there.  He refers to Socrates directly in the speech when he says “Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so we must see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood.” (King, Letter) Like Socrates, King suggests that it is necessary to question the complacency in society to obtain genuine abstract knowledge and rise above an unjust status quo rather than accept complacency that restricts their individual and collective freedom.

            In both situations King and Socrates try to convey universal concepts to define humanity and justice. Reason was fundamentally used by both of them to arrive to their philosophical concepts.  The two understand freedom does not equate to power in either of their societies because exclusivity is used to justify inequality. Socrates conveys the universal concept as something that allows people to fully understand their experiences. Within reason, difference carries no valued distinction, and there isn’t a concept of “better than” and neutrality is a base. “Wealth does not bring about excellence, but excellence makes wealth and everything else good for men, both individually and collectively.”(Plato 30b) King faced a society where one community had more power based on inequality because of systemic denial.  Socrates’ Athenian society too had imbalanced communities due to systemic denial. Ultimately, for Socrates his death was a way to force the society to liable for their actions in order for them to self reflect and self evaluate. “I was convicted because I lacked not words but boldness and shamelessness and the willingness to say to you what you would most gladly have heard from me…” (Plato, 38d) For King, it was his imprisonment that coerced society to reflect upon itself. “I submit that an individual who breaks the law, that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.” (King, Letter)

            Meletus, Euythypro, the segregationists and moderate Christians opposed Socrates and King because their conservative perspective limited them.  They inevitably feared change and feared losing their identity which is why they rejected King and Socrates.  Change isn’t purely arbitrary. These accusers were incapable of accepting and considering these complex ideas of justice, universal humanity and community and simply continued to submit themselves to the status quo. They were blind to the opportunities that could have manifested from the changes King and Socrates spoke of. Negligence paired with limited perspectives cannot justly provide guidance for one’s actions.  Euthyphro had a very limited “black and white” approach to society as opposed to Socrates which some might consider to be “gray”. Decisiveness is essential to justice because it requires one to see and acknowledge various possibilities. Euthyphro and Meletus are limited by thoughts because they need the god’s approval and therefore, they are inadequately conveying a false idea of justice.  Though Eythrphro may like to believe he is adhering to justice, prosecuting his father suggest that his motivates are less clear than he would have liked society to believe. Euthyphro recognizes justice is essential. His contemporary idea of justice is based on knowing whether or not it obeys the laws of the gods. Conversely, for King, the Birmingham clergy and segregationist would praise the police for disciplining protestors and would attempt weak non binding negotiations that had little to no effect at all.  “Justice delayed was justice denied.” (King, Letter)

            Though King and Socrates’ societies existed in completely different times and places, the theme of justice is clearly the same. The idea of inclusion and equality has to be incorporated with justice as a priority in order for there to be a cohesive and fundamental development in society. There is no agency in obedience. Progress requires ideas of principles. That is what is absent from the opposition’s argument of justice. There aren’t any principles being offered in any of the concepts put forth by the segregationists, Euthyphro or Meletus. King and Socrates both offered a plethora of principles in their universal concepts and their defense against their accusers and the wrongs of their societies.