Because there's no money or fame to be made being a rapper who assaults other rappers. At least anymore, god willing.

sharitaatx was pointing out that the protagonist has essentially no family. When someone is offering you a home when you have nowhere else to go, I can see falling hard and fast.

Yeah, but…if somebody decides to take a bullet meant for the least respected artist in modern hip-hop, wouldn't you instantly win the beef by just pointing that out and laughing? Folks are having to bust out their tinfoil hats to find a different target.

Agreed. And not just outside of the mainstream (heII, I think the mainstream only encompasses ~30% of pop culture at this point), but aggressively so and in a patently offensive way.

Agreed. And not just outside of the mainstream (hell, I think the mainstream only encompasses ~30% of pop culture at this point), but aggressively so and in a patently offensive way.

Seriously. "No, I wasn't taking a shot at the *king*, it was about the *jester*."

Not even damaged so much as without family. Doesn't matter what the guy's mental state is, just that he doesn't have folks inquiring too hard when he vanishes.

About the only White artists who do address Whiteness are skinhead bands and similar explicitly racist groups.

Pretty much. Lifted straight from the article:

F**kboi di tutti f**bois?

Whether they do or not, they'll never *say* they dislike him.

*furiously Googles a non-pants meaning for "chinos"*

It's beyond that. It's that even if you have a film that doesn't have white villains, or doesn't explicitly tackle racism, a mere absence of white people means white audiences will not get invested in the story.

The "maybe another woman isn't the answer we need" line always came across like the music-switch cue for a gay chex scene.

The "maybe another woman isn't the answer we need" line always came across like the music-switch cue for a gay sex scene.

I'm seeing the choice of brown liquor here as a "bring me my brown pants" situation.

So much this. Three centuries later, capitalism most certainly is The Establishment, but when Smith was writing it was a new and visionary idea. If you want to replace capitalism, you need to understand the problems it was made to address.

Damn shame. Wealth of Nations actually supports a lot of outside (i.e. government) regulation in markets, because Smith realized that totally "free" markets never remain so for long. Plus it's nice to read someone forcibly argue *for* capitalism, rather than just assume it as an objective good the way it's…

Bees? That a Wicker Man remake reference, or just a personal opinion?

How hard is nationalization? Does he speak French? Would an inability to do so hinder this effort?