- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
Billie Eilish joined Bad Bunny in speaking out against ICE during her acceptance speech at the Grammy Awards, slamming the organization after winning song of the year for “Wildflower.”
The singer was bleeped as she said “fuck ICE,” giving strong commentary during the speech. “Thank you so much. I can’t believe this. Everyone else in this category is so amazing. I love you so much,” she said, standing next to her brother Finneas. “I feel so honored every time I get to be in this room. As grateful as I feel, I honestly don’t feel like I need to say anything but that no one is illegal on stolen land. And, yeah, it’s just really hard to know what to say and what to do right now, and I feel really hopeful in this room, and I feel like we just need to keep fighting and speaking up and protesting, and our voices really do matter, and the people matter, and fuck ICE. That’s all I’m going to say. Sorry. Thank you so much.”
You must log in or # to comment.
It’s nice to see the media allowing people to criticize the government again. Sure fuck ice was bleeped but it’s still getting out. The more outspoken the people are the more the media can’t ignore it and must show it. Especially famous people speaking out since they always have an outlet to the masses.
Sure fuck ice was bleeped but it’s still getting out.
The Grammys are broadcast on CBS. Broadcast TV has to follow FCC rules about profanity. Not bleeping fuck would mean pretty hefty fines, and IIRC those increase based on viewership. Cable and streaming services don’t have to follow those same rules.
There are clips that are not bleeped, including the clip on the official Grammy Youtube channel, because that was only done for the broadcast version.
Honestly, in an award ceremony, they would probably get more attention if they bleeped out all the comments and not just the cuss words. It’s probably the reason CBS is no longer going to host the Grammys after such a long time.
She seems like a decent person.
She is correct and very cool of her to say so.
Popular music was the anti-Fox News back in the day, but it dead now.
Nice to see the echoes tho.
Edit: not sure what people are taking away from this but just to clarify, I liked the popular music that was anti-Fox news and appreciate the current popular musicians doing what they do. It’s just that the music industry - suspect in the best of times - finally succeeded in killing itself and what we have now is some American Idol game show / hype influencer Frankenstein that’s both worse and not popular.
The effect of which is that “Fox News” stands alone.
You’re right. I honestly rather see celebrities in the streets in solidarity with the people, freezing and standing up to ICE. They are condemning ICE in their fancy clothes. It’s just them sucking their own dicks. Everyone hates ICE. It’s not bringing attention to anything. The shootings are doing that.
Don’t downplay the importance of influence. That was a large audience and using the platform to at least say something encourages others to start being comfortable saying the same thing. Most people aren’t the protestors in Minneapolis, including most of us here. By opening the door to outward criticism, people that follow these artists and listen to them are being given further permission, internally, to voice the same opposition.
No, it’s not as brave as standing face to face with tyranny in the streets, but both fronts are worth fighting on.
While I do agree, they should’ve been screaming the message earlier. With more passion. Not “um, ICE sucks. Fuck em. They bad.” They can do both. It’s just most of them are too comfortable in their mansions to go the next step and practice what they preach.
I’m a nobody, but earlier last year I became a community leader and helped organize protests in my red city. Imagine what they can do if they are shoulder to shoulder with the people.
If you have influence, you also have the responsibility to make sure your voice reaches as many people as possible. Screaming this message earlier is a good way of lowering your chances of getting access to a mic at the Grammy at a moment where most people are listening.
Everyone was clapping. Everyone agreed. Everyone already knows the situation. They know it’s now safe to speak against ICE so it won’t hurt their bottom dollar.
No, not everyone hates ICE, unfortunately. Here on lemmy sure. But this was an opportunity to get a message out to the Fox listeners, the trumptards, the people who have not heard, or don’t believe what’s actually going on.
At this point, nothing will change their mind until ICE is knocking down their front door or shooting someone they care about.
As pessimistic as I naturally am, I actually don’t believe that. The trump administrative lies all the time, Fox News lies and spins an incredible amount, there are constant lies on Xitter. I think they do this because they have to. They know that if the truth was more unavoidable, they’d face much more backlash from the typical trump backers. I’m sure plenty of Trumpers wouldn’t care, but I think there’s a significant group of trump supporters who are only so because they’re stuck in the right wing echo chambers.
celebrities aren’t normal people. they don’t want to be around you. they just want your money. and they will say what they think will get them money.
the only solidarity they have with is other wealthy people who have the same struggles as they do about wanting to use their private jets.
Most art is that way, because art of any relative depth takes you into consideration and therefore probable empathy, and thus not a Republican.
f-f-f-f-f-ucking BASED, Every word she said was like it came out of my own mouth, I love the little bastard
Removed by mod
You can’t meaningfully own something that existed before you and will continue to exist after you.
The concept of private property, especially in regards to land ownership is spurious to ridiculous.
Now your breath you own. Your spoken words you own. Thoughts, too. They will all die with you and can’t exist without you. Though, ownership here isn’t implying originality of any kind. You can own thoughts that you did not originate. That’s how cults spread.
Think of an apple trying to claim ownership of the apple tree from which it hangs.
So philosophically, I agree with you, but how would the logistics of land use work without something similar to ownership?
Like, how would you decide who gets to live where?
everyone would magically self determine that and there wouldn’t be any conflict because there would be endless abundance and we would all be endlessly happy forever.
the earth being a finite resource over which there is inevitable conflict is a social construct of our minds, clearly.
who gets to live where in reality, is a determination of systems of government and law. in some systems land is entirely own by the state and the state grants people temporary rights of use. essentially, a lease from the government.
and private property purists will argue without unless government guarantees land ownership and rights in perpetuity, that government can’t be legitimate and they also typically see taxation of land as a form of injustice.
That’s a good question with endless possible answers.
I can’t speak for everyone. But I like the idea of egalitarian intentional communities, as a demsoc. No representatives or charismatic leaders. Smaller communities with direct democracy I think would be ideal. A place where you know everyone’s name and vice versa.
In the 1800s in USA, people were simply traveling around freely by horse, discovering new places, and if they found a place they liked by a lake or river by a beautiful waterfall or a place with great agricultural potential, they would just plant themselves there and build a house without having to ask permission from anyone. Later in the 1800s the government swooped in and decided the government owned everything and made all those people pay the government for the rest of their life to live anywhere 😠
You can’t guarantee what apple you’ll get from its seed though…
all “owned” land is
Wtf why removed by moderator, what a joke censorship platform is this
Kurt Cobain making a come back?
I’d like her head intact. Me might need it
More specifically, FUCK YOU KRISTI.
Removed by mod
The main contention for calling land stolen is if the people settling it displaced other people to do so. It’s possible to settle land without displacing its current inhabitants, and I wouldn’t consider that stealing.
Okay, rephrase… where do people live now where no one was displaced?
(all land has original owners that were displaced)
they don’t.
the ‘stolen land’ argument derives from some idealized utopia that doesn’t and never existed. its similar to the ‘noble savage’ myth that if ‘society’ didn’t exist we’d live in paradise because human beings in their ‘natural state’ are angelic and pure and the world would be abundant and perfectly happy.
and nobody who uses it is going to give way their land they own ‘back’. Billie Eilish has multiple properties and none of them are being donated to indigenous people. If you confronted her about that she’d probably call you an asshole and tell you it’s not her responsibility and that some other rich white person should do it, but not them! it was those bad evil people who they are not one of!
It is quintessential virtue signalling. You argue from an ideal that is far fetched that the very same ideal is not one you’d hold yourself accountable too because that would be ‘crazy’ to do so.
to really give back ‘stolen land’ the us government would have to basically displace it’s entire population to unhabited parts of the country where nobody could really live. the reason the natives were ‘displaced’ is because they lived in the places that were desirable to live in and the settlers wanted the land. most of the world’s land mass is not easily inhabitable or agriculturally productive, so humans fight over the parts that are.
and that’s also why nobody fought for land claims in antarctic or the artic, because there was no point. but with global warming possible making it more habitable, we are starting to see polar powers prep for military conflict over it.
it’s also why if you buy 1000 acres in northern california for a few million, because nobody wants that land, and the same price gets you like 400 sq ft apartment in manhatten.
I invite you to listen to the people who have, for hundreds of years, been kidnapped, raped, beaten, tortured, killed, poisoned, humiliated, dehumanized, robbed, genocide, persecuted, and as of now are incarcerated at levels 10x that of any other group.
https://ndncollective.org/landback/
https://davidsuzuki.org/what-you-can-do/what-is-land-back/
In some cases, land is directly returned to Indigenous people when private landowners, municipalities, or governments give the land back to Indigenous tribes. This may take the form of a simple transaction within the colonial real estate framework. In other cases, the transfer of ownership of the land may not be feasible. Co-management of public lands has emerged as a means for Indigenous voices to be consulted concerning the stewardship and use of ancestral lands.
if billie eilish wants to buy up a bunch of land and give it back to people, that’s her business. why doesn’t she do that personally, rather than lecturing people at the grammies? leading my example is a lot more powerful than lecturing from a bully pulpit.
she certain has the money and power to make a difference in this regard. but i don’t think she is talking about this particular issue, so much as grandstanding about being anti ICE for scoring some political points.
why doesn’t she do that personally, rather than lecturing people at the grammies?
To let dipshits like you come out of their woodwork to endorse atrocities of their ancestors.
Thanks for your service.
Though I bet when you have to face even a slightest inconvenience with immigrants, you become the victims of the century.
right, my 1850s ancestor who was a substance farmer in Italy totally stole the land from the native americans…
“I want to live in most expensive city in the USA, and I want it to smell like urine, I want to smell urine everywhere I go every second of every day”
I don’t get it. I’m not saying it should be illegal or anything, but… yeah.
I live in one of the most expensive zip codes in the world. It doesn’t smell like urine other than on the subway elevator, which i never use.
I live here because it’s fucking amazing living here, but no place is perfect. The people generally suck balls, but I love being able to walk to a restaurant with my dog and not having to drive a car unless i want to do so. I’m sure living in 1000 acres in northern California has it’s benefits, but I’m not equipped or interested in such a lifestyle. Maybe if I was a prepper I would be.
I reject the premise that there must be some magical land where people have lived undisturbed since the beginning of time for you to even consider that it’s possible to peacefully coexist. There are plenty of places and times where people have settled an inhabited area and did not displace the natives, but no land where no one was displaced for all of human history, and that’s an unreasonable thing to demand I give an example of.
I don’t need a magical land where people lived undisturbed since the beginning of time to consider it’s possible to peacefully coexist.
Of course it’s POSSIBLE.
It’s just rare and temporary
I disagree that it’s rare. In fact, peaceful coexistence is the norm and violent displacement is the anomaly. It only seems like that’s not the case because peace is delicate and unmentionable (what’s there to say in history books about nothing happening?) while violence is sudden and has permanent consequences. A peace lasting centuries can be ended by a single violent event, and that single event will be written about in greater detail than the centuries of peace that preceded it. Our perception of human nature is also skewed by the fact that we’re currently living in a global order dominated by violent settler-colonial factions who have created a system of extraction based fundamentally on theft.
Where has there been peace lasting centuries? Seriously.
Our waves of violence are practically generational , we get brief breaks in between the horrors.
If there are exceptions I am not familiar. Certainly never a century of peace, to my knowledge, or even close
I am not familiar with the history of all of the Earth, I would certainly be interested in any centuries long peace anywhere.
Just picking a random region of the world and looking at Wikipedia’s list of conflicts in Asia, you can try counting the years in the gaps between conflicts and comparing them to the duration of the conflicts themselves. I would bet good money that the average duration of periods of peace in any given region is greater than the average duration of conflicts, and that cumulatively years spent peacefully coexisting far exceed the years spent in conflict.
Notice also that the bias towards violence being mentionable and peace being less so is evident in the fact that I had to do this by finding a list of conflicts rather than a list of peaceful periods.
You’re not incorrect, but the bigger issue is how was the native population treated after having their place stripped from them. It wouldn’t take much for governments to recognise and attempt reconciliation for the idea of stolen land to become less prominent. This is true everywhere, not just in NA.
This is happening right now in SA, and for the same reasons now that we used centuries ago (we need money!).
Who will stand up for the tribes, or for that matter the jungles they live in? Nobody
All we’ve learned since slavery days is a change in semantics with occasional apologies.
The one exception being that island of “hostile” (i.e. wise) natives in the Indian ocean. Our one tiny exception to the rule.
I wish we could learn more about them without ruining it all. Sorry for tangent
So just make them slaves? Cool. 😎
That you don’t even consider coexistence before immediately jumping to slavery as the only alternative says a lot about you.
Not really. But jump to conclusions all you like. It was just an historically popular option. I don’t support slavery.
You don’t seem to understand the history you’re referencing. Slavery and mass displacement / ethnic cleansing aren’t mutually exclusive, they are mutually interdependent. Empires engaging in settler-colonialism didn’t choose one or the other, they did both, always. Even if they outlawed slavery domestically, they still participated in the trade internationally or in their colonies. Settler-colonial empires still engage in slavery to this day, they’re just better at hiding and justifying it. See: the US prison system and abuse of migrant workers, and the kafala system in the middle east (called the “binding system” in Israel until it was de jure abolished in 2006, but de facto continues to this day in a sort of legal gray area). These days the word slavery makes people squeamish, so we call it things like human trafficking, prison labor, migrant labor, and all sorts of other more polite euphemisms to lull us into the false notion that slavery is a thing of the past - or at the least relegated to a tiny secretive black market.
Look at that moral lecture/history lesson you gave me over a joke that whooshed over your head.
You weren’t ‘correcting history.’ You were correcting something you hallucinated
You can go somewhere and start living there, that’s perfectly good.
If you torture the people there to death and say nobody is allowed to live here besides you, then it becomes “stolen land.”
Colonization and conquest are unethical compared to immigration is what I am trying to say.
What you just described as stolen land is historically the way people claimed ownership of lands by conquering them by killing the people there or telling them to get the fuck out, or another great option is make them slaves.
And the historical method was unethical and backwards.
I grew up in Turkey where people extensively talked about how Ottoman empire was great for conquering so much meanwhile the Kurdish population is treated inhumane to this day.
Conquest is Barbaric and was murder even back then. It’s just a mix of “history is written by the victors” and “time makes people forget” that we don’t judge all countries for colonization.
Someone that wants to take over ‘your land’ and kill you or enslave you probably doesn’t really give a fuck about ethics. Especially cuz they’ll probably consider your kin subhuman.
Can you pray to ethics? Are there ‘acts of ethics’ that are going to save you?
There is no country on Earth that isn’t here or there without colonization, wars, and abundant ‘crimes against humanity.’
And much more than just crimes against humanity! There is no country on Earth that isn’t here without helping to kill +90% of the fucking wildlife and wild habitat on this planet.
Anyway back to the first paragraph I made. You’re never going to convince those type of people that will burn you and rape you and enslave you that they should listen to your ethics and they should obey your laws and then your Justice will rain (reign) supreme all over the land with rainbows in the sky and the bears and the lions are hugging the piggies and the bunnies.
I don’t think it’s ethical either, we agree on that!
But I do think being a “colonizer” is practically everyone in the last few millennia, excepting the Sentinel Island natives perhaps and other very rare exceptions to the rule.
The Japanese were colonizers of Japan (supplanting the prior native population), Americans were colonizers of North America, Aztecs were colonizers of South America, English were colonizers of the UK, Romans were colonizers of Italy and most of Europe and North Africa, and so on forever
It’s all basically boils down to ‘my God (or other authority) says we own this land.’
Land is never really owned so it can’t really be stolen. It can be conquered, though. You can have dominion over it. It’s not really ownership, though. Ownership is more of an abstraction(contracts, deeds, bureaucracy and legalese) - it’s not a real thing, it’s an idea. I’m not sure people can own ideas, either… I think more so the ideas own them.
I wonder how much longer Americans will have dominion of America?
five years, tops
I personally think Trump will be a great catalyst for a socialist resurgence and will perhaps make America greater and more united than it has ever been.
I think he is the canary in the coal mine and could never be elected in an actual functioning “democracy/republic”; the mere fact that he is in office means we’re just in the beginning stages of an absolute shit show heavily influenced (perhaps controlled completely) by the heritage foundation/council of foreign relations and their financial backers (it’s actually a pretty fascinating rabbit hole)
I 100% hope that you are right and I am wrong. Maybe we could even get union membership over 10%, CRAZY
Yes. If you want to deport innocent people. move to the Pacific garbage patch.
I cannot have more respect for a person than I have for Billie.
this comment section is heavy on the “socially liberal, fiscally conservative” vibes
Removed by mod
Me when I can’t see past the literal letters on the screen
Always loved how much she speaks about important topics.
One of the best vegan artists I know!
Well, I mean there’s one group.
You know . . . the
colonialsthieves?blood and soil
Ashes to ashes
