Minaj responded, "But look what happened to Kanye when he spoke out. People told him to apologize to Bush! ... Because how many times can you be made to feel horrible for caring about your people before you say...it's not worth it..."
It's sad that black artist's are made to feel their careers will be jeopardized should they decide to involve themselves with activism.
When Kanye spoke out about the racial strife in New Orleans during the Hurricane Katrina catastrophe, he was applauded by many but made to feel inadequate by a few -- that few made him meet with George W. Bush, to issue a public apology for calling the nation's leader a racist.
But Kanye West honed his activist genes honestly, with a professorial mother and aerial photo journalist father, who educated him on the racial epidemic that long plagued their existence -- teaching their son how to survive as a black man in America; Kanye brought his education into his artistry.ALL THESE PEOPLE DERIVE FROM A POLITICAL PAST THAT COULDN'T BE IGNORED WHILE MAKING STRIDES TO PENETRATE THE ENVIRONMENT THAT PURPOSELY KEPT THEM OUT, THEY HAD NO CHOICE ON WHETHER OR NOT ACTIVISM SHOULD-BE EXERCISED BECAUSE IT WAS CRYSTAL CLEAR TO THEM THAT IT WAS NECESSARY.
Artists are natural activists, because many artists' stepped into their careers on the strength of activism.
Ruby Dee, Lena Horne, Pam Grier, Diahann Carroll, Eartha Kitt, Ossie Davis, Harry Belafonte, Sidney Poitier, Langston Hughes, Paul Robeson, Alice Walker, Henry Louis Gates Jr., Lorraine Hansberry, Public Enemy; all these people derive from a political past that couldn't be ignored while making strides to penetrate the environment that purposely kept them out, they had no choice on whether or not activism should-be exercised because it was crystal clear to them that it was necessary.
Moreover, because activism has always been apart of the arts in one way or another, it would seem easier for artists to use their ever-present platform to shine a bright light on the places where injustice lies. After all, if minorities from the past challenged the status quo when racial violence was at its most extreme, then why wouldn't minority artists seek to challenge it now since the load has been made somewhat lighter, due to the efforts of those whose shoulders we now stand upon? Is it really fear of being blackballed? Fear of losing profit? Fear of losing fans?
And if an artist can use their artistry to shock people's nerves through the form of nudity, foul language, improper conduct with regards to murder, weaponry and illegal drug trade, why is it then more difficult to influence art in a positive and progressive manner using ingenious activism to responsibly affect the livelihood of people versus negatively?
Is seeing the naked body doing much to progress society, unless it supports a particular cause? What about foul language -- is it a great tool for youth to have? Do gangs, guns, killing and the use of harsh drugs serve a positive purpose for humanity? Then why push these topics on our children more so than the tools that'll help them to live?
Yes, art can be explained as the unexplainable and anyone can deem their work of art to be just that, but in hindsight given the precarious past that has brought us into the present moment of #BlackLivesMatter and the #ICantBreathe movement, doesn't it almost seem obligatory for not just minority artists...but for all artists to join in solidarity with the people?
On a side note: Hip Hop artist Q-Tip, recently broke down the fundamental understanding of where Hip Hop came from and what it really means to be an artistic activist.
2015 LA
