Hip Hop Republican, a blog I've been trying to read more, posted their very intriguing "'Hip-Hop Republicanism': A Manifesto" yesterday. This is a trend I've been noticing for the past two to three years: a very thin layer of hip-hop generation folks who represent a minority left tendency within the Republican Party. They, like Michael Steele, recently elected RNC Chair, embrace hip-hop and oppose the mainstream old school racism of white Republicanism that relegates hip-hop to violence.I haven't given this phenomenon a lot of thought, but from what I can tell it is a result of two things; one, the fact that America itself is becoming more hip-hop and that hip-hop as such is becoming more diffuse throughout mainstream society, and two, the growth of hip-hop as an industry, or to use the Republican lexicon, as a "job creator."
What we've often referred to as "Hip-Hop Conservatism" is distinct from Hip-Hop Republicanism. Back in '97 when I was still a b-boy in a Kansas City-based crew called The Circuit Breakers, a friend and fellow dancer remarked, "Rebel (my hip-hop moniker of the time), you're like a hip-hop republican." Of course, he was talking about my hip-hop cultural conservatism as I was politically left. I, like other cultural conservatives then, was railing about the need for hip-hop to remain true to its so-called essence.
Hip-Hop Republicans aren't necessarily cultural conservatives (as indicated by their identification with the artists below), but are a logical extension of this conservatism into politics. The difference is that they aren't explicitly loyal to any one form of hip-hop, just as we at D&HHP aren't.
Their proof of hip-hop's positive force is in (surprise!) its entrepreneurialism. Everyone from Russell Simmons and Jay-Z to T.I. and David Banner are championed as a testament to hip-hop's commitment to free markets and as a provider of jobs for people of color and poor youth.
Part of how the neoliberal platform of the Republican Party has been packaged in terms of social spending has been its replacement by the encouragement of private funding and charity. Tax money has been cut from the wealthy, appropriated from the poor, and used to fund American geopolitical interests and war on people of color. This bankrupt philosophy has proved itself unable to fix what in reality will take a massive reinvestment into infrastructure and social institutions. The "golden era" of American capitalist expansion (1946-1973) meant a historically unprecedented investment in the "social wage" and even that was not enough to stifle working class rebellion from the black community to the women's movement who were fighting for direct democratic control of workplaces, schools, and communities.
The mainstream of the Democrats and the teabag crackers believe that this is what Obama is doing. He is not. Forty-five percent of Obama's stimulus has been tax cuts. The money supposedly earmarked for infrastructure development won't create jobs with livable wages, but will go to contractors who will make beaucoup dough relying on ultra-exploited undocumented labor. Obama is no FDR. And FDR's New Deal is no model for change anyhow.
The "Urban Republicans" ensure us that they aren't anarchists or right-wing von Mises Institute-type libertarians who oppose the State, but rather, like Republicans generally, support "small government." This kind of disingenuous language is supposed to gloss over the fact that the Republican Party has been intrinsic to the enormous growth of the federal government in the past thirty years. The "small government" talk was used to justify undoing government regulation of capital, but to impose the greatest amount of regulation on labor with ever more laws and labor department appointments that aimed to repress working class organization.
But Urban Republicans don't ever look to become the dominant force in the Republican Party. Many Republicans are demanding Steele resign which indicates how closely rooted in old school white supremacy the GOP is. Of course, we're not naive enough to think that the Democrats are any kind of legitimate opposition to white supremacy within official society. On the contrary, they represent its advanced wing. Not only that, but Urban Republicans aren't a viable enough hegemonic opposition, let alone numerical, to overcome the Party. They hope to push the GOP to the left and supplant themselves for what can only be popular control from below.
For those wanting to stay abreast of how Urban Republicans are orienting to the hip-hop generation, check out Hip Hop Republican.

