Was Dave Chappelle Taken Down by Oprah and Co?

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl

It's a matter of perception. You see people like that as fools, unaware or unconcerned with the TRUE life.

They see people like you (not a slander) as fools, unaware or unconcerned with monatary value and prestige.

I know that's true, but it made me sad.

I spoke in general terms about the effect, the outcome, of racism. It definitely serves the purposes of the PTB, imo. Whether or not there are any individual incidents, staged, or otherwise, could point to a "see I'm just like you" scenario, further perpetuating the illusion of connection between the classes.

The insinuation of guilt is always there, and it is those who claim they 'have nothing to feel guilty for' who spread it. Forgive me for pointing out that throughout the long and winding road of recorded history the rise and fall of cultures and civilizations has had everyone under the other's thumb at one point or another. To take the last, say, four hundred years, out of context, and try to hold a generation unconnected to the accused iniquity responsible for reparations is patently false and ridiculous, imo.

o.p. by HH
Also, considering the fact that a lot of us have African, European, and Native ancestry, we are 'African-American' in a very real sense, a combination of all the groups who built this country.

This is another claim that needs examination, the pan- American, we built this place for you claim. Without the capital, and the materials, and the direction and planning, nothing would have been built. It was a co-operative effort, an all-American, not African-American, effort. It even included Irish-American, and Chinese-American effort, if you don't mind my saying so. The institution of slavery played a small part, early on.

My ex used to tell me all the time that black people couldn't be racist because of slavery. Again, this is another claim that just doesn't stand up to close scrutiny, imo. Just the opposite might be true. The relatively (historically) recent experience of slavery may be a bigger justification for black racism than the residual 'Mean Overseer' mentality is to blame for white racism, again imo.

[edit on 7-2-2006 by Icarus Rising]

My responses are in bold.

Originally posted by Icarus Rising
I spoke in general terms about the effect, the outcome, of racism. It definitely serves the purposes of the PTB, imo. Whether or not there are any individual incidents, staged, or otherwise, could point to a "see I'm just like you" scenario, further perpetuating the illusion of connection between the classes.

Ok, I can see that. I always thought that if all the non-rich people could get it together, regardless of color, we could give the PTB a run for their money.

The insinuation of guilt is always there, and it is those who claim they 'have nothing to feel guilty for' who spread it. Forgive me for pointing out that throughout the long and winding road of recorded history the rise and fall of cultures and civilizations has had everyone under the other's thumb at one point or another.

Unfortunately, it is extremely difficult for African-Americans to pinpoint where exactly any of us came from (without DNA testing), so while I agree with what you said about every group having done something to another group, I simply do not have enough information, and I know I don't have to tell you why.

To take the last, say, four hundred years, out of context, and try to hold a generation unconnected to the accused iniquity responsible for reparations is patently false and ridiculous, imo.

Hmmm... I don't really know how I feel about reparations. I can see why contemporary white Americans would look kinda askance, like, what do I have to do with it? But, on the other hand, you have to understand that, having worked so long for free, for private individuals who then paid taxes to the state, black people feel that they deserve something for their efforts, from whomever. For other colonized peoples, once they've thrown off the yoke, they at least might get their land back and/or sovereignty. Due to the specifics of the situation, that's not possible, so now what do we do? Actually, I think that the promise made by General Sherman after the Civil War, of 40 acres of tillable land, was a good idea. Unfortunately, local, Southern, white politics, and vigilante-ism, squashed that. I'm not sure how we can fix it now, honestly.

o.p. by HH
Also, considering the fact that a lot of us have African, European, and Native ancestry, we are 'African-American' in a very real sense, a combination of all the groups who built this country.

This is another claim that needs examination, the pan- American, we built this place for you claim. [I did not say that, you may be referring to something else you heard from another black person.] Without the capital, and the materials, and the direction and planning, nothing would have been built. It was a co-operative effort [If you re-read the part of my post you quoted back to me, you might see that this is actually what I said] an all-American, not African-American, effort. It even included Irish-American [I know. I wrote about my teeny, tiny part of Irish ancestry in another thread, and I do make a point of know 'all parts' of myself], and Chinese-American effort...The institution of slavery played a small part, early on. [I must admit, I am a bit insulted by that. Please see Slavery in North America. African slaves provided free labor from 1619 to 1865, about 250 years, out of a history that only spans 386 years, counting from colonization.]

My ex used to tell me all the time that black people couldn't be racist because of slavery... [I've heard that before too, and I disagree, I know plenty of black people who are very racist. I think what she meant was that our racism doesn't matter; no one is affected by it and no one cares. 'Racism,' officially refers to dislike of a person because of their race (in general, that's what black people have the power do when they're 'racist'), but to me, 'racism' is not getting a job I'm qualified for because of my race (in general, that's what white people have the power to do when they're 'racist').]

I do tend to rant at times. No intention to insult you on my part. I was speaking in terms of US history when I said American history. The legacy of slavery and civil rights is the defining issue in this country's effort to live up to its mandate. That, and all the trouble we are having with illegal immigration lately. Maybe the Patriot Act is the answer.

It seems, according to you, I may have misinterpreted the quote I used from you, as it did sound quite similar to something I had heard before, many times. Again, if so, my apologies.

I'm glad you did see my point concerning all issues, racism being one, that divide the middle and lower classes from themselves and each other benefit the PTB. Cohesive pressure for opportunity and equal treatment regardless of bank account balance was the message behind DC's humor. To have it dissolve into a 'keep whitey out of your pocket' moment on Oprah is definitelty a step in the wrong direction, imo.

Originally posted by Icarus Rising
I do tend to rant at times. No intention to insult you on my part. I was speaking in terms of US history when I said American history. The legacy of slavery and civil rights is the defining issue in this country's effort to live up to its mandate. [Whew! Was that on point!

] That, and all the trouble we are having with illegal immigration lately. Maybe the Patriot Act is the answer.

[Would you mind explaining that, just a little?]

Cohesive pressure for opportunity and equal treatment regardless of bank account balance was the message behind DC's humor. To have it dissolve into a 'keep whitey out of your pocket' moment on Oprah is definitelty a step in the wrong direction, imo.

Well, at least something good came out of it: he did seem to reach the conclusion that he wanted to give some of his money to charities, and I assume those would be the issues he wants to address.

ps, this post is terribly formatted, and may have many errors, but I wanted to finally catch you online

shoot, i missed you anyway

[edit on 7-2-2006 by HarlemHottie]

Maybe the Patriot Act is the answer.

Another lame attempt at humor. I do that a lot. I'm not a big fan of the Patriot Act, because it restricts freedom. I have always thought more freedom is the answer, not less. That's what we tell the rest of the world, anyway. Blanket curtailment of civil liberties is not going to help catch terrorists, imo, just like gun control will not take guns out of the hands of criminals. We need to be free to make as many choices as possible, imo, and suffer the rewards and consequences accordingly for those choices. We will probably catch more, and create less, terrorists that way in the long run.

Same reason I don't want to see DC's act muzzled the way it looks to have been. (Ouch. I hurt my grammar bone.) When the consequence is inverted, and applied for speaking out, and keeping it real, as seems to be the case with DC, where it looks like he poses some kind of a perceived threat to the status quo of black comedy, I start to have a problem with the way the system is operating. I sincerely hope others see what I'm saying, agree, and have the same problem with this issue.

The only way to bring positive change to the system is to identify the problems, agree on what they are and propose solutions, prioritize the solutions according to the severity of the problem, and start applying the correct solution to the biggest problem first! We will never get there if people aren't allowed to speak out, and keep it real.

Works great in theory, but is a heck of a challenge to apply.

I just have a question here. But first to set this up.

Okay, I'm white. I've live in the Suburbs, Trailer Parks, and even what is considered in my small area the Ghetto (major 'black' population density in run down neighborhood. Ghetto is funny to me, as it origanally dealt with run down areas in Hispanic lands, little huts and such, not massive housing tenements).

I've been to different countries, most notably Germany. So I've seen a little in my 26 years.

Why the big 'African-America' deal? Why the big deal from any race?

Lennox Lewis. He's dark in skin tone. Some would call him black. What does he call himself? BRITISH. And not African-British, either.

So it's two problems I have. The first, why is putting anything in front of -American so important? I've never heard one call themself "African-German" or "Chinese-Austalian" but in American it seems we just can't be an 'American'. Worse, we put 'American' in the SUB CATEGORY, FOLLOWING THE MAIN. Shouldn't it at least be American-African?

Secondly, shouldn't pride and love come from those things we choose? I'm proud when I choose to do something to help others. That's pride. I would never say something like "I'm proud to be White!" Why would I be? I didn't choose to be White, I never made a motion to be considered White, I have no control over being White. What is there to be proud of? It's like saying "I'm proud to be Male!" Big whoop! What did you have to do to become Male? Oh, nothing?

I just don't see the point. I don't dislike being White. I don't hate White People. I just don't see how anyone can say "I'm proud to be X" Now, I'm proud that I climbed a mountain. That makes sense. It took alot to do that. Proud you got a raise. Good deal. Proud I'm not a lousy sack of worthless human. Kudos and congrats. But to be proud of something you have no choice in, what sense does that make?

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
Secondly, shouldn't pride and love come from those things we choose? I'm proud when I choose to do something to help others. That's pride. I would never say something like "I'm proud to be White!" Why would I be? I didn't choose to be White, I never made a motion to be considered White, I have no control over being White. What is there to be proud of? It's like saying "I'm proud to be Male!" Big whoop! What did you have to do to become Male? Oh, nothing?

I just don't see the point. I don't dislike being White. I don't hate White People. I just don't see how anyone can say "I'm proud to be X" Now, I'm proud that I climbed a mountain. That makes sense. It took alot to do that. Proud you got a raise. Good deal. Proud I'm not a lousy sack of worthless human. Kudos and congrats. But to be proud of something you have no choice in, what sense does that make?

Hey, I'm proud to be an Aussie and talk about your accidents of geography, I mean, I didn't exaclty line up at the desk and tell them I wanted a stork headed Down Under!

On the other hand...I'm sure Michael Jackson is proud to be black. Or White. Or something...

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
So it's two problems I have. The first, why is putting anything in front of -American so important? ...

In America, people have always referred to themselves as (ethnicity here)- American, likely because this was the only country, for a while, founded by immigrants. People already had their own identities when they got here... it takes a few generations for most immigrants to become, simply, "Americans."

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
Why the big 'African-America' deal? Why the big deal from any race? Lennox Lewis. He's dark in skin tone. Some would call him black. What does he call himself? BRITISH. And not African-British, either... Secondly, shouldn't pride and love come from those things we choose?... I would never say something like "I'm proud to be White!" Why would I be? I didn't choose to be White, I never made a motion to be considered White, I have no control over being White. What is there to be proud of? It's like saying "I'm proud to be Male!" Big whoop! What did you have to do to become Male? Oh, nothing?

Although I don't personally know Lennox Lewis, and so I won't presume to speak for him, I do get your point. Off the top of my head, and with no sources, I'm going to explain how I feel about both of these questions, because they're kinda the same thing in this case.

I know there was slavery here for a long time. I also know that white people aren't inherently evil and barbaric, so how could they have done all those terrible things for so long? Well, an easy way to convince them would have been the skillful use of propaganda. Subsequently, for a really long time in American history, two major forms of public entertainment were lynchings and minstrel shows. As for private forms of entertainment, aside from the likely n- word jokes, I can only guess, but black people were there, and they heard the whole thing. There was no pride in being black then.

I also know that lynchings and minstrel shows continued way past the Civil War.

So I can imagine that, when black Americans start to feel as though they've finally thrown off most of the yoke of oppression (late 1960's- early 1970's), and they've stopped trying to conform to mainstream standards of beauty and style by straightening their hair and wearing clothes designed for European bodies, they were feeling pretty damn good! Finally, there was pride in being their black selves.

That's how I understand it, anyway....just checked wiki and they more or less agree with me.

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
But to be proud of something you have no choice in, what sense does that make?

Well, people of African descent have, in fact, managed to carve out a 'choice' of some sorts. One can 'choose' to be "black." I do. I refer to myself as 'black,' or as a 'black American' in an international context. We can, for example, choose to refer to ourselves as everything else in our family trees, except 'African!' (Don't laugh, it's true, and I've seen it in real life ) We can also disassociate ourselves from the great masses of blacks who fill the urban ghettoes. Have you ever seen Imitation of Life? If you have, you know what I mean.

On the other hand, a lot of West Indian (of African descent, just to be clear) people I know are very adamant in "not being black American," because, admittedly, we look bad to the world and are, I think, largely misunderstood. A lot of African people, too, prefer to be referred to by their country of origin for, I assume, much the same reason.

That's why, at the end of the day, I am "proud to be black." Because I did choose it, knowing full well that it's a heavy cross to bear.

[Having said that, I'd love to share it, so if any other "people of African descent" disagree, jump in.]

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
Ghetto is funny to me, as it origanally dealt with run down areas in Hispanic lands, little huts and such, not massive housing tenements.

As a sidebar, that's not true. Dictionary.com says the word describes "a section of a city occupied by a minority group who live there especially because of social, economic, or legal pressure," so I don't think that the style of the housing really changes the overall point.

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
On the other hand...I'm sure Michael Jackson is proud to be black. Or White. Or something...

haha! I think its the "or something."

Perhaps I am daft.

I do see where you are coming from, yet fail to see the connection. You are proud because you choose to act in such a manner. That I understand. Yet that manner you act in has nothing to do with a color of pigment in your sking that you did not choose.

Eminem for a prominent point, and many others who do not share such a pigment (and they didn't choose theirs either) may well act in those same manners. It doesn't make them Black, or proud to be Black. It may well make them... well... would Urban fit?

Lennox Lewis (no links, sorry. Interviews on a few occasions after matches, one in particular in the US. "How does it feel to be a prominent Black athlete?" was a paraphrased version of the question. His answer, "I'm British".)

Ones Nationality may be a source of pride, but only the way ones favorite sports team is. After all, people can always move elsewhere if they truly despise where they live, and choose a different Nationality. So in that regard I can see a sense of pride in a Nationality. But a pride in Race... that is tough for me to see.

Saying "I'm proud to be *insert race here*" is taking credit for something you had no control over. Saying "I'm proud to be a Doctor" makes sense. You worked hard and choose to be that. "I'm proud to be a German!" You either took action and moved to Germany and got citizenship, or you liked it enough to choose to stay as a citizen. "I'm proud I lost 20 pounds" Yep, a sense of pride for ACCOMPLISHING something.

That's the thing for me. You should have to earn something to be proud of it. No one 'earns' the color pigment they have. Until people get past this, racism will always run rampant. Because people will put way to much value and emphesis on what shade a person is, and not WHO a person is or HOW a person is.

People should stand up and do things worth being proud of, not merely say they are proud of something which they had no control over or choice in.

In a way, this all ties in with the Chappelle issue. I for one could care less that he's dark. He is an American, making light of conditions in America while illustrating through humor just how horrible some situations in the Country are. That's what draws me to him. Some say he was funny, but that he played the race card. A white man couldn't do those jokes. Why not? Chappelle was an equal oppurtunity jokester, bashing white and hispancis as much as blacks, all the while showing real world issues. Things were fine.

Then came a division. All of a sudden it's not good enough to be an American of great talent, while showing the world such situations so they must face them for a better future. Now he has to be black, and the whites want in his money. What did that get all of us?

One less great mind, giving one less great performance, that truly was allowing changes to be made because it made certain subjects available to talk about.

All because some one had to go and get caught up in skin pigment.

Be WHO you are, be HOW you are, and hope to be judged by those things you CHOOSE. Nothing else matters. Until people realize that, things will never change.

Originally posted by HarlemHottie
That's why, at the end of the day, I am "proud to be black." Because I did choose it, knowing full well that it's a heavy cross to bear.

Okay, I think everyone here knows I'm white, and if you read the previous pages you know I'm an Aussie. So...

In Australia we find a lot of humour in "Black". Because our national experience is so different, as is the experience of our "black" people. We took their land, we didn't bring them here.

So, after three decades of being bombarded with Hollywood's mon-culture, we feel we understand the (media's presentation of the) US. And therefore find a number of the stereoptypes that appear to be funny. Especially when they are being lampooned, by others or their subjects.

So...Undercover Brother was funny to me. So was the tapescript I heard of Dave Chapelle's "At home with the ni@@ers". That was damn funny. As is Mel Brooks' Blazing Saddles. That one is seriously funny, but I guess you've really got to be funny to ba able to do that sort of thing.

In that vein I quote The Committments:

"The Irish are the blacks of Europe. And Dubliners are the blacks of Ireland. And south-siders are the blacks of Dublin. So, say it once and say it loud "I'm black and I'm proud".

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
You are proud because you choose to act in such a manner. That I understand. Yet that manner you act in has nothing to do with a color of pigment in your sking that you did not choose.

Eminem for a prominent point, and many others who do not share such a pigment (and they didn't choose theirs either) may well act in those same manners. It doesn't make them Black, or proud to be Black. It may well make them... well... would Urban fit?

As a starting point, I didn't mean "acting black." That is a new phenomenon, brought on by our improved status and perceived 'coolness." I was not talking about that and I'm sorry if I gave you that impression. What I was referring to was claiming black history as my own, taking the baton from the older generation and continuing the fight for equality. Eminem hasn't done that... at least, not that I've seen, but, yes, he would qualify as 'urban.'

I think Eminem is a lyrical genius, but that doesn't make him black, or even give him half-a-right to claim it, unless I misunderstood you. Poor white people have enough to worry about without adding black to the list.

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
Perhaps I am daft.

Don't say that! Remember, the only dumb question is the un-asked one (or something like that).

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
I do see where you are coming from, yet fail to see the connection...[For example,] "I'm proud to be a German!" You either took action and moved to Germany and got citizenship, or you liked it enough to choose to stay as a citizen.... a sense of pride for ACCOMPLISHING something.

Well, how about: "I'm proud to be a black American! We could have all committed suicide during Middle Passage, or during slavery, or during Reconstruction, or during Jim Crow, but we didn't. We could have, en masse, lost faith in God, but we didn't. We could have shut up after the Civil War, and just been happy to be free, but we didnt." Personally, I don't think I would have had the strength for those fights, so I'm both grateful and proud that they did.

Blacks did take action and 'accomplished something'. Although we were already here, and had been here since before the Revolution (in fact, we fought and died in that war and every one since), we still were not citizens. We had to fight for that honor (not just go into an office and fill out some paperwork). Then, we had to fight to vote. Then, we had to fight to live where we wanted, and to attend decent schools, etc.

So, I have to admit, even though I said the mantle was heavy, I do feel proud that my people accomplished so much, under such adversity. Not only did we survive, we also accomplished amazing feats, given the racial climate in those times.

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
No one 'earns' the color pigment they have.

No, but for black Americans, the color of their skin was always a disadvantage here. So while we didn't 'earn' our color, because of it, we did have quite a time trying to 'earn' any kind of respect, or humane treatment. Remember, for a very long time, we were considered little more than animals. You have to agree, we made great strides.

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
Be WHO you are, be HOW you are, and hope to be judged by those things you CHOOSE.

Sure, but, at the end of the day, one can only hope, like you said.

Speaking of Eminem, though, if you saw Eighth Mile then saw the freestyle battle where he, rhyming before anyone else, listed all the reasons he could be made fun of (living in a trailer park, poor, etc), thereby diffusing his opponent.

I never thought about this before, but maybe thats what black people did by claiming pride in what had only been a disability (preconceived notions of intelligence, pseudo-science, etc.).



[edit on 9-2-2006 by HarlemHottie]

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
"The Irish are the blacks of Europe. And Dubliners are the blacks of Ireland. And south-siders are the blacks of Dublin. So, say it once and say it loud "I'm black and I'm proud".

Very interesting. I like it: if the struggle black Americans have endured can help any formerly or currently oppressed people, good for them!

HH Maybe you could shed some light on this one.
Do you see a color based hierarchy within the black community? I remember reading somewhere that the lighter skinned blacks looked down upon the darker colored. Is this real?
Just a thought that has been in the back of my mind, and never came up in a conversation.

Originally posted by shadow watcher
Do you see a color based hierarchy within the black community? I remember reading somewhere that the lighter skinned blacks looked down upon the darker colored. Is this real?
Just a thought that has been in the back of my mind, and never came up in a conversation.

No problem. You're denying ignorance, and that's why we're all here, but you sure picked a big subject to tackle.

Quick history lesson: Wherever there has been colonialism, there is a color- based hierarchy. From Asia, to Africa, to the Americas, the results have been the same. There are several reasons why, but it really depends on the 'tone,' I guess, of that specific colony.

For blacks in North America, the 'tone' was mostly harsh, especially in the 'deep South.' The vast majority of slaves worked in the fields, a few in trades or apprenticeships (like blacksmithing, or whatever else you would need on a farm), and a few who worked in 'the big house,' cooking, dusting, and serving as personal maids/manservants. I would assume that the sexual dynamic worked pretty much the way you'd expect, from best- to worst- case scenario.

This is what seems to have happened in most cases: the slaveowner would choose whomever, she would likely acquiesce, or need to be threatened first. Having caught his eye, she would get pregnant, often, until she got too old. She might even have disliked her own children a bit, for being the result of rape. Eventually, she might have teenage daughters, who would be 'approached' by, basically, her relatives, or by their friends. Either way, the offspring would eventually get lighter and lighter, until some sympathetic slaveowner, or heir, or whatever, freed them because, by that point, they would have looked white.

But, before that happy day could come, the original (fully- black) matriarch of such a clan would, essentially, prostitute herself to her (and all the other slaves') master and tormentor. Of course, everyone knew what was going on; sometimes, even the slaveowner's wife was aware, though she had no recourse. Accordingly, the 'mistress' and the slaves treated her differently: the former, definitely jealous, would sometimes antagonize her (harrassment, beatings, etc), while the latter, perhaps a little jealous themselves, or resentful, treated her like a 'lady'... of sorts.

Eventually, the family had better clothes, better food, better lodgings, and better chances to get off the plantation.

Back then, being light-skinned was the result of a sordid family history- Thomas Jefferson's Sally Hemmings was the result of a family tree like this- but, since the propaganda of the time portrayed any 'black' features as ugly, in a strange turn of events, the whole thing ended up being positive. Let me repeat that: due to the very peculiar nature of American slavery, a rape in the family history was a good thing.

That's where the hierarchy comes from, the plantation.

If you're into Anne Rice, she wrote a book on the topic, Cry to Heaven
Here's a link if you're interested in fact, not fiction: Harriet Jacobs, author of Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl

In terms of current events, does it still exist? Yeah. Long after slavery, light-skinned blacks remained the most likely to get opportunities, because they maintained contact with their white family (though rarely, if ever, as equals). If you look at any of the old 'first African-American to achieve XYZ' pictures, they're usually light-skinned and that's why.

That lasted until about the 60's or 70's, when all blacks got the right to attend state universities, graduated, and achieved stuff. Since that was the same time period as "Black Power" and "Black is Beautiful," I would imagine that the cultural memory of the plantation hierarchy had started to fade.

Personally, though, I use music videos as a gauge... let me explain . I see rappers, in casting girls for music videos, as representing the general tastes of young black men. Normally, they choose light-skinned to brown-skinned black women, with only the occasional dark-skinned beauty, most of whom have hair- weaves, and latinas, who may or may not have weaves. I'm not really surprised in their choices, since spanish-speakers often share black neighborhoods. However, since, alternatively, the rappers could have exclusively cast black women, I did have a question: did they choose latinas because of their hair (texture, length, etc), or their skin-tone? With that in mind, I recently noticed a lot of East Indian women (I think), so that leads me to believe that light-skin isn't so much the issue anymore, as is hair.


Hope that helped.

Sorry to change the current topic, but I just watched it and I was rivited. I find DC interesting, genuine and fascinating. Really an incredible guy.

I would say his experience in Africa balanced him out just as he needed.

[edit on 12-2-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Sorry to change the current topic, but I just watched it and I was rivited. I find DC interesting, genuine and fascinating. Really an incredible guy.

No, no, thanks... we had gone terribly off track, so good for you for steering us back!

I didn't even know about the Actor's Studio appearance, but I'm gonna check to see when my cable provider shows it again...

Also, I'm really excited about that movie he has coming out, I think, March 3rd.

Originally posted by smallpeeps
[NOTE: This was posted by another user under the title, "The Shocking Story Of Chapelle's Censorship" and as I was reading the link, that user's post got trashcanned. In fact, the post is very interesting and I figured I'd re-post it. If the media can use force to alter what Americans see on TV, well, that's conspiracy.]

www.chappelletheory.com...

Here's the actual website. The individual claims to be a PR rep, and the writing seems consistent with that. He says that black American power brokers took Dave Chappelle down. This is the truth about what happened, I believe. Chappelle was way too funny and way to offensive to the powerful.

This is the modern day example of how censorship is quietly used. It comes in the form of pressure from your peers who have supported you and loaned you money while you were struggling.

February 5, 2003
Robert L. Johnson, alerted by the rumblings coming from the Cosby, Farrakhan, and Sharpton camps, decided to tune into this show to see what Chappelle had been doing that was getting so many black leaders rankled. After watching the show, Johnson reportedly thought to himself, "Bill, Al and Louis may be right — if this really blows up, it sets us up to be minstrels again." Just as Cosby and Farrakhan did, Johnson decided to get involved as well.

April 9, 2003
Louis Farrakhan, most likely under the direction of Cosby, sought out the opportunity to speak with Chappelle. Farrakhan, who had advised Chappelle on his conversion to Islam in 1998, visited Chappelle on location days after the episode aired. His concerns fall on deaf ears, as Chappelle was resistant to pressure to tone down the show's content.

April 20, 2003
With Chapelle's Show on hiatus before production for season two commences, Chappelle took some down time at his Ohio area farm. It was here that he received a strange package.

As told by Dave himself, at around noon, in the middle of an early season Cincinnati Reds game, there was a knock at his door. Chappelle was a bit concerned, as no one except his close family and friends were aware of where he was.

When he opened the door, all he found was a crudely wrapped package, with the inscription "For Chappelle" on it.

Inside the package was a voodoo-doll style replica of Chappelle dressed as Clayton Bigsby — the African American Klansman from his first show. The doll was riddled with safety pins, and had a noose tied sharply around his neck. Accompanying the doll was a message in a childlike scrawl that read, "what you're doing is hurting the African American community — it needs to stop."

I do believe this is how it went. Cosby sees himself as the American realization of black properness, so when you combine him with Oprah and Robert L Johnson [owns BET and megabucks], well, it doesn't matter how funny your show is. You're going down.

I wanted to post more here but I'll see if anyone wants to read the site and offer their opinion. It's important to look at issues like this which sometimes seem innocent. Here we have the funniest black actor in years, who doesn't adbide by the black power brokers like Oprah, Cosby Robert Johnson, Farrakhan, etc --and gets taken down for it. This says a lot and although it's not aliens or bohemian grove, it's still pretty eerie.

And sad too, because Chappelle's Show was hilarious. It really hit a chord among young people of all colors who can easily see that people like Cosby, Winfrey, Goldberg are lying to them.


[edit on 17-12-2005 by smallpeeps]

It's not real.

Here is a link----->Clicky
It's mad to see how gullible people are. Or racist.

Originally posted by trudginup

It's not real.

Here is a link----->Clicky
It's mad to see how gullible people are. Or racist.

So who are you saying is a racist? The people who pulled off the prank, or us at ATS?

Just to point out, I had a friend tell me about the Chappelletheory.com web site, a month or two ago, and he thought it was true ( and he is black ) so the will to belive or just wanting to figure out why Chappelle went AWOL is strong in alot of us. But it doesn't mean we are racist.

I asked my self years ago what would happen to me if I won the lottery or became rich some way and I figured I would blow it some how (drugs over eatting, some other form of over ingulgence) and this was well before Dave did it, so I would imagine it would be hard to bust your but your whole life, work hard at what you do and then to become as succesful as Dave has become that it would be a heavy burden to bare ( no matter what race you are).

Good luck Dave.