Local rapper at forefront of Occupy Oakland movement (Q&A/Community Voices)

Boots Riley leads the march to the Port on Nov. 2

Boots Riley leads the march to the Port on Nov. 2

During the course of the Occupy Oakland movement’s development, local rapper-activist Boots Riley has emerged as one of its most visible faces.

Over the past two history-making months, Riley has literally walked the walk and talked the talk. He’s stayed true to himself and never stepped out of his own character - a charismatic and articulate advocate for better conditions, who just happens to own the most recognizable Afro since Angela Davis’ heyday.

On Oct. 14, Riley, accompanied by Gabby LaLa on sitar (a plucked stringed instrument ), was one of the first hip-hop artists to play in the renamed Oscar Grant Plaza, and he’s been a constant mic-checking presence at General Assemblies, rallies, press conferences, as well as contributing many lengthy posts in social media forums.

During the Nov. 2 General Strike, Riley led the march to the Port of Oakland, walking determinedly in front of two large banners reading “Occupy Oakland” and “General Strike,” looking like a man on a mission. In a movement which prides itself on having no leaders, Riley has led by example and been a source of inspiration for many.

This should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with Riley or his music. The son of civil rights lawyer Walter Riley, he has been organizing around progressive causes since he was 14. Since their 1992 debut single “Not Yet Free,” Riley’s hip-hop group The Coup has been one of the most consistent acts in the genre, as far as political messaging goes.

Indeed, perhaps only Public Enemy, dead prez and possibly Paris can claim a similar level of commitment to the cause of social and economic justice for oppressed people and the urban community. He’s also taken over where Rage Against the Machine left off, with his other band, Street Sweeper Social Club, a metal-rap outfit featuring former Rage guitarist Tom Morello.

At times, Riley has seemed prophetic. The highly-controversial, and never-used, original cover for the Coup’s 2001 album "Party Music" appeared to depict the World Trade Center about to be blown up, though, in actuality, the artwork was finished months prior to Sept. 11. Riley also was one of the first rappers to get on board with the anti-war movement, at a time when former President G.W. Bush-sanctioned patriotic fervor quashed many voices of opposition in the public sphere.

If there was an official soundtrack to the Occupy movement, it probably would have a high degree of verisimilitude to the Coup’s entire catalog, which has long championed the struggles of the underclass. In an interview conducted on Nov. 1 - the day before the General Strike - Riley discussed the relevance of his music to the movement, his thoughts on capitalism, and what labor actually means.

Q:
The fourth day of the General Assembly, you performed “Underdogs.” Of your other songs, which of them do you think really identify with this movement?

A: There’s “Get Up.” There’s “5 Million Ways to Kill A CEO.” There’s “Everything.” You know, “every broke motherfu---- finna form a gang/When we come, we takin everything.” Probably every single song that I’ve ever written applies to what’s happening [now]. 

Q: Which song specifically, do you feel identifies the most with the Occupy movement?

A:We are The Ones.

Q: And the concept behind that one is …
 

A: “We, we are the ones. We’ll seal your fate, tear down your state, go get your guns. We, we came to fight. It’s your disgrace”… anyway, it’s just saying that, we are the ones that are gonna make the change. We, the people listening to the song and singing along with me. We’re not waiting for a leader.

Q: You kind of outlined the whole 99 percent thing before that was even really a thing.

A: Well, the whole 99 percent thing is really just another way to say working class vs. ruling class. It’s a way to create a way to say that. I think 99 percent vs. 1 percent is a little less precise, because it doesn’t talk about the relationship between the 99 percent and the 1 percent. But, it’s talking about that same thing.

Q: Can you speak on the relationship between labor and liberation?

A: Capitalism’s definition is in its exploitation of workers. That’s where the definition [lies]. And what we’re doing is, we’re struggling at that line, which is, how much people get exploited and how much labor’s wealth goes to the people. Now when I say, labor, people think, SEIU and ILWU, and things like that. But I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about everything that is made, everything that is serviced, that’s labor. And the boss makes most of the money. And that’s exploitation. And the labor is what creates the price of that product, whether that product is a service, or that product is a physical commodity.

Q: I read somewhere that the ratio of the average CEO salary to the average worker salary in America is something like 475:1.

A: I would believe that. I don’t know that for sure, but it makes sense. And so that shows you how much extra wealth there is to go around. And they’re not gonna give that to us on our own. They’re only gonna give that to us by force. But in-between that, we can get a little bit of it back by saying [to CEOs], you can either make nothing or make less. And that’s what this first step [the General Strike] is saying.

The first step, as Riley called it, did indeed prove successful as a symbolic protest statement. A crowd estimated at anywhere between 30,000 and 100,000 successfully shut down the Port of Oakland, after a daytime demonstration, which brought tens of thousands of folks to downtown Oakland. It was probably Occupy Oakland’s finest moment ... to date.

Of course, that success was short-lived. Later that night, a small group of protestors set fires, broke windows, spray-painted tags and confronted police, undermining the non-violent action of the march on the port.

While that tactic continues to be the source of much controversy and debate, it hasn’t deterred Riley’s enthusiasm for the cause. In a recent post to his Facebook page, Riley noted, “Occupy Anchorage is now on board for the December 12th West Coast Port Shutdown. This means that we now have Occupy Oakland, Occupy LA, Occupy San Diego, Occupy Portland, Occupy Tacoma, Occupy Seattle, Occupy Vancouver, and Occupy Anchorage all working together in a coordinated effort that will cause Goldman Sachs and {multinational grain exporter] EGT the loss of tens millions in profit at least.”

Sounds like Riley has just begun to fight.

Eric K. Arnold has been writing about urban music culture since the mid-1990s, when he was the Managing Editor of now-defunct 4080 Magazine. Since then, he’s been a columnist for such publications as The Source, XXL, Murder Dog, Africana.com, and the East Bay Express; his work has also appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle, Vibe, Wax Poetics, SF Weekly, XLR8R, the Village Voice and Jamrock, as well as the academic anthologies Total Chaos and The Vinyl Ain’t Final. Eric began his journalistic career while DJing on college radio station KZSC, and remembers well the early days of hip-hop radio, before consolidation, and commercialization set in. He currently lives in Oakland, California.
Monica's picture

This rag and its primary contributors continue to display a sympathetic shoulder for the far left (or a disrespect for those who hold different opinions). First, the plaza in front of City Hall is Frank Ogawa Plaza. Second,  I believe the reference to G.W. Bush should be along the lines of former President Bush. I am similarly bothered by media individuals who refer to President Obama as Mr. Obama without first introducing him as the President. 

Boots as prophetic, that is a bit of a stretch.

As for the interview, nice interview, but I think it is important to note that while CEOs do earn somewhere between 400 and 500x the average employee, a significant amount of that compensation comes through stock awards. For example, former Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz's salary was $1 million which was probably on the order of 10 - 12x average Yahoo employee salary. Her stock awards pushed her total compensation over the top. If anything, people should be arguing for a more liberal distribution of stock awards for employees who add value to the company.

I do ask who is really going to be hurt by a port shutdown, the 1% or the 99%? This is one of the reasons that many of us are annoyed with the 99% and why in the long run this movement will not change how business operates.

Eric K Arnold's picture

"people should be arguing for a more liberal distribution of stock awards for employees who add value to the company."

well said, Monica, well said.

Aaron Parr's picture

Monica wrote: "This rag and its primary contributors continue to display a sympathetic shoulder for the far left (or a disrespect for those who hold different opinions)."

Very telling comment in that this is in reference to an article about one of the voices of the 99%, a movement which does not take a left or right side on the political spectrum, a movement of the overwhelming majority of US citizens. Political left and right should not enter into the discussion. The Tea Party which shares a great deal of the exact same complaints as the Occupy movement now does was a right wing movement. But to call Occupy left wing... just exposes how out of touch one is with reality.

 

Monica wrote: "I do ask who is really going to be hurt by a port shutdown, the 1% or the 99%? This is one of the reasons that many of us are annoyed with the 99% and why in the long run this movement will not change how business operates."

Annoyed with the 99%? Well those in that group are not many, and so I don't see why the "annoyance" of a tiny minority should matter given that those are the people causing the problems that many are trying to solve.

As to the rest of us being hurt by a port shut down... thats a non-point (although a very old one). Without general strikes, without actions such as this, all you can do is watch your standrds of living decline while the rich get richer. It is that simple.

Monica's picture

Riley noted, “Occupy Anchorage is now on board for the December 12th West Coast Port Shutdown. This means that we now have Occupy Oakland, Occupy LA, Occupy San Diego, Occupy Portland, Occupy Tacoma, Occupy Seattle, Occupy Vancouver, and Occupy Anchorage all working together in a coordinated effort that will cause Goldman Sachs and {multinational grain exporter] EGT the loss of tens millions in profit at least.”

Loss of tens of millions in profit seems like a stretch and for any one company the "loss" is probably less than 1% of annual profits. But the people who are going to feel it are not the CXOs. It will be the rank and file employees who do not have employment contracts and get smaller raises and year end bonuses. THe shutdown won't change the stock price so the executives will still earn their stock bonuses. The consumers will feel it because the cost will be shifted to the consumer. 

As a member of the 99, I must ask, "who is being harmed by the shutdown?"

Anca Mosoiu's picture

Well, the people who will be directly and immediately harmed ARE probably the port workers.  However, a port shutdown will generate fear and uncertainty in the stock market, which will reduce the stock prices of some companies, the taxable income ofthe people who sell the stock, and the value of everyone's 401K portfolios.

Because of the laws in this country, most corporations are legally obligated to act in a way that maximizes shareholder value, rather than stakeholder value.  This means that they can do whatever they want to employees, the environment, and everything else they can get legally away with, in order to increase the price of the stock in the short term. 

Our financial system is intricate and inter-dependent, and skewed towards those that already have money and power.  Actions like the port strike will not change that immediately - but it will make the powers that be take notice, and hopefully result in changes to the laws that skew things in the wrong (for most of us) direction.

Monica's picture

Anca, with the exception of the direct harm to the port workers, you are completely off the mark with your analysis.

The fear you think you are creating is noise. People who own stocks do it with the long run in mind - a one off ripple is not going to hurt the stock prices of any of these companies. (And on the off chance that it does, why do you want to harm the 401Ks of rank and file employees who are holding company stock.

You may want to pick up the annual report of these companies that you think are doing much harm. Most CEOs recognize their role in the community. Levi Strauss for example is looking for ways to reduce the amount of water used in the production of jeans. Have you seen SC Johnson commercial? Sustainability is their middle name.

Don't drink the Kool-Aid!