By Andre E. Johnson
Presented at the National Communication Association Conference
November 21, 2008
On June 13, 1992, then Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas and Democratic Nominee for president gave a speech at a Rainbow/Push Coalition gathering. As he courted black voters with promises of rebuilding crumbling inner cities across America, many remembered this speech for the critique Clinton leveled at hip hop activist Sister Souljah who had spoken at the gathering the previous night. Clinton’s critique of Souljah was not leveled at the speech she gave at the Rainbow/Push event, but at comments she had previously a month earlier to a reporter of the Washington Post.
Clinton started his critique of Souljah by directly confronting the audience in attendance by saying:
You had a rap singer here last night [on the panel] named Sister Souljah….Her comments before and after Los Angeles were filled with a kind of hatred that you do not honor today and tonight. Just listen to this, what she said: She told the Washington Post about a moth ago, and I quote, “If black people kill black people everyday, why not have a week and kill white people….. So if you are a gang member and you’d normally kill somebody, why not kill a white person….” If you took the words ‘white’ and ‘black’ and reversed them, you might think David Duke was giving that speech (Edsall A1).
After acknowledging that the Rainbow Coalition honored the four black people who saved truck driver Reginald Denny who assailants pulled from his truck and beaten during the riots and honoring the white man who taped the Rodney King beating, Clinton further said about Souljah
[Souljah] was invited to speak here and what she said was so inconsistent with what the folks are all about….What she said really bothered me, not only because she said it but because she is somebody who obviously is bright and has a lot of influence over young people. And I think we have to take issue with it…..We have an obligation, all of us, to call attention to prejudice wherever we see it (Esdall A1).
Clinton’s critique of Sister Souljah in front of the Rainbow Coalition defined as the “Sister Souljah moment”, irked Jackson and many people associated with the Coalition. However, in other circles, good political strategy determined Clinton was not going to be beholden to any one or any group. Many have written about this moment and some even argued that this was the defining moment of Clinton’s campaign.
However, what has not been written about much is that a week later Souljah called a press conference to defend herself against Clinton’s charges. While many in the mainstream political world saw this as simply a political strategy aimed at repudiating Jesse Jackson and the Rainbow Coalition, Souljah and the hip hop community viewed Clinton’s remarks as a dis—which in hip hop lingo is short for disrespect and when one feels dis, one must respond.
In this paper, I offer a textual analysis of the speech Souljah offered at this press conference and demonstrate that while Souljah did offer a strong response to Bill Clinton, she also opened up a space for what I call a hip hop ethos. While many textual critics concern themselves with a history and veracity of a text, this is not my concern. Souljah text is in the public domain and thus I treat it as a rhetorical artifact that currently shapes thoughts and opinions.
Souljah’s Speech
Introduction
Souljah starts her speech by quickly positioning herself as a “very confident, steadfast and powerful young African woman,” who is “surprised” that she has “impacted and effected the development of not only national politics, but international politics as well.” She finds it “shocking” that at a time of “economic recession, and inner city chaos, Bill Clinton has chosen to attack “not the issues but a young African woman who is very well educated, alcohol free, drug free and a successful self-employed businesswoman, and community servant.”
Furthering her positioning, Souljah wanted to “clarify to the press who I am.” She defines herself as a “rapper, activist, organizer, and lecturer” who was “born in the Bronx, New York.” She speaks of being “on and off welfare”, while being raised by her mother (no mention of father), and living in subsidized housing.” She supplemented her education by reading “African history” which enabled her to become the “well-balanced, reassured woman that I am now.” She worked as an intern for the Republican Party in the House of Representatives, attended Rutgers University, and won an oratorical contest. She had studied abroad, has work with, and shared the platform with both national and international dignitaries. Thus she argued that she was “no newcomer to the world of politics and she was emotionally, intellectually, and academically developed” to handle this situation.
She further suggests that her record 360 Degrees of Power would tell everyone who she is and what her positions are but she argues, that since “Bill Clinton was unfamiliar with me, my development and work…he chose to comment without any investigation whatsoever.” However, unlike Bill Clinton, [Souljah] asserts that she did not fail to do her research.
He research leads her to offer seven critiques aimed at Clinton. She claims that Clinton “is a draft dodger” who “feels it’s alright to send your son to fight wars when he himself would not fight for the principles he says he believes in.” Second, she offers a comparison between herself and Clinton my mentioning that the former “talks about morality but admits he was a reefer smoker,” while the latter “has never smoked reefer or any other drug.”
Third, she mentions Clinton’s extramarital affairs by saying that while Clinton “believes in a strong family unit,” he could never quite get his own personal and social behavior together” and she criticizes him for “attacking and alienating women for his own shortcomings.” She also critiques Clinton for joining an all-white country club, supporting giving prisoners lobotomies, for not having a “substantive, comprehensive agenda around economic development, foreign policy, or social policy, and for distancing himself from Jesse Jackson, who in Souljah’s estimation, is “more qualified for the job.”
She sums up her argument by denouncing Clinton as a person who “lacks integrity as a “staunch patriot, a people’s servant, a compassionate liberal, a family man, pro-woman candidate and a coherent scholar.” Moreover, Souljah argues that Clinton “used” her as a vehicle, like Willie Horton and other Black victims, which for Souljah makes him a “poor excuse” and an “agenda-less candidate.”
Souljah then turns her attention to America or society in general through indirect comments aimed at establishing her ethos but at the same time, putting distance between herself and the America that Clinton is running to represent. By anaphora, the repetition of a clause at the beginning of a sentence, Souljah recalls some of America’s indiscretions with this elongated paragraph.
Sister Souljah does not own a gun, has not shot or killed anyone, did not invade Grenada, Panama, Nicaragua, Kuwait or Angola. Sister Souljah has never ordered the National Guard into anyone's community and has not made drug deals with Noriega. Sister Souljah has never been a member of a terrorist organization, has no history of crime, has not burned crosses on anybody's lawn or lynched or hanged White people from trees. Sister Souljah has not systematically denied people the right to study and enjoy their culture in the so-called public education system. Sister Souljah did not send Haitians back to Haiti as though they were sub-human. Sister Souljah did not kill the native Indians under the guise of friendship. Sister Souljah did not cause or inspire police brutality, did not beat Rodney King, or shoot Phillip Panell and never shot and killed a little White girl in the head for stealing orange juice and let her murderer go free. Sister Souljah did not vote on the Simi Valley jury and let criminal cops free. Sister Souljah did not create the economic conditions of South Central L.A. or any other urban area for that matter, and did not create an environment of insecurity that forced people into gangs (Souljah).
She concludes her recall of history by reminding her audience that she is not a racist because “neither Sister Souljah nor any other African leader in this world has the power to collectively and systematically beat down and destroy European people.” “White people,” she continues, “deny it all, refuse to discuss it, silence intimate and harass those who take a stand and fight back.” Souljah then affirms her anger—equating her anger of that of a “sane person” who understands that she has a right to be angry at the “racist White transgressions of this society.”
Souljah then shifts to the event that precipitated the Clinton response and the one that brings her to this point. She reminds her audience that her comments should represented the “mind-set of a gang member.” Therefore when she said to the Washington Post reporter:
Were you surprised at what happened in L.A.? No, I was not, White people should not have been surprised either; they knew that Black people were dying everyday in the streets of Los Angeles to gang violence created by poverty and social chaos, but they did not care. If young Black men in L.A. would kill their own kind, their own Brothers and Sisters, what would make White people think they wouldn't kill them too? Do White people think they're better, or is it that White death means so much more than Black death (Souljah)?
Souljah argues that she was taking on the persona of a gang member and not speaking as or for herself.
Souljah concludes her speech by invoking a popular Martin Luther King Jr’s phrase—“injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” She follows this statement by saying she “reserves the right to fight against White racism” and reminding her audience that she did not “order anyone to kill anyone.” She further argues that her album creates pressure on “White America” and where there is “no justice,” there will be “no peace.”
Creating an Hip Hop Ethos
Drawing from the work of Michael Hyde, my use of ethos is not limited to the character or ethical standing of the speaker. Hyde argues for a wider understanding of the term—referring to ethos as a way “discourse is used to transform space and time into “dwelling places” where people can deliberate about and “know together” some matter of interest” (xiii). Once formed, these “dwelling places” become spaces where the speaker’s ethics and moral character begin to take shape. It is not that the speaker comes to the speaking event without ethics and moral character, but the dwelling place creates the space for ethics and moral character to be on display.
Defining ethos as “discourse used to transform space and time into dwelling places,” opens up an avenue that would allow us to understand Sister Souljah’s oratorical performance in her response to Bill Clinton. While Souljah faced several rhetorical challenges, the main challenge she faced was a perception problem. Many argued that hip hop artists and by extension all of hip hop culture should not be looked upon as experts in the political arena because the art form was one that promoted violence, and non-affirming values for children and society.
It was in this context that Sister Souljah responded to Bill Clinton and began to establish a hip hop ethos. Her first rhetorical goal was to create space that would allow her to speak and to have an audience to hear. The press conference gave her a platform to speak, but her construction of a hip hop ethos allowed her voice to have an audience. Speaking authoritatively, Souljah quickly establishes her ground by feeling “very confident, steadfast, and powerful.” In other words, she alerts her audience that she will not be intimated, weak, or stand down in the face of criticism, which she felt was not fair.
After Souljah developed the “dwelling place” and established her position as oratorical emcee, her second rhetorical strategy was to offer a compelling narrative that provided two rhetorical functions. First, the narrative functioned to introduce Souljah to a wider audience. At the time of her speech, Souljah’s notoriety was strong in the hip hop community by her association with the rap group Public Enemy and rapper Ice Cube—top artists at the time. However, before the Clinton event, Souljah was practically unknown to the mainstream society—and if a mainstream audience knew her at all, it was for the comments attributed to her from the mouth of Bill Clinton. The narrative offered Souljah the chance to define herself against the perceive notions of herself and hip hop.
Second, the narrative also helps Souljah create the dwelling space where her ethics and character could develop. Throughout the narrative, Souljah shares with her audience her story in her own terms. Souljah is not one dimensional—she is a “rapper, activist, organizer, and lecturer.” She has been involves with politics, attended Rutgers University and has spoken on the platform with world leaders. Thus, Souljah’s narrative also becomes a refutation against the prevailing thoughts of what hip hop is suppose to be because she does not fit the mold.
Souljah’s third rhetorical strategy is the critique of Clinton. The critique, as the narrative, serves two purposes. First, in hip hop, a verbal dis cannot go unanswered. Souljah’s seven criticisms of Clinton offer a platform to address the character assassination of her by exposing character flaws in Clinton’s own life. However, the second purpose is that it sets the foundation to expose hypocrisy not only in Clinton’s life, but also in the life of the nation. By asserting that Souljah “never own a gun”, invaded any two-third world country, dealt with dictators and terrorists, or caused or tacitly approved any oppression against other humans, she offers a strong critique against America.
Finally, the fourth rhetorical strategy employed is the explanation of hip hop culture. Souljah has already demonstrated her knowledge of the political climate and now she offers an explanation on her comments. She defends them as her riff on her adopting a gang member persona to make a bigger point. In other words, Souljah is not making the comments; her persona does. What Souljah attempted to do is to offer an understanding of hip hop culture and what it does—by adopting different personas, one can acutely offer comments and criticisms of the wider culture. In other words, whereas Lisa Williamson could not grab the mike and speak, Sister Souljah, by adopting a gang member perspective, can command the mike and grab an audience.
Conclusion
The goal of this presentation was to demonstrate how Sister Souljah created a hip hop ethos that gave her a space to offer not only a stinging invective against Bill Clinton, but also to refute some of the misconceptions and beliefs about the hip hop community. In so doing, she created Hyde’s “dwelling space” where authentic character and morals could develop, which in turn, gave her a place within the national discourse.
Drawing from this speech, I assert that a speaker creates a hip hop ethos by first creating a space from which to speak, second, offering a compelling narrative, third, offering a critique of a person/society and finally explaining or (re) defining hip hop. However, rhetorical critics must examine more texts to see if a genre develops. My work in establishing a hip hop ethos is in its embryonic stages and needs further developing. Works from both hip hop and rhetoric scholars should prove fruitful as we both engage future hip hop performances[1].
Works Cited
Esdall, Thomas. “Clinton Stuns Rainbow Coalition: Candidate Criticizes Rap Singer's
Message.” Washington Post 14 June 1992: A1
Hyde, Michael. The Ethos of Rhetoric. Columbia, South Carolina: South Carolina
Press, 2004
Souljah, Sister. “Sister Souljah Statement.” Rock Out Censorship
http://www.theroc.org/roc-mag/textarch/roc-09/roc09-07.htm
[1] This is also part of a larger project I am working on: Establishing Ethos through Hip Hop Oratorical Performance.
