A few months ago, rapper Dr. Dre (aka Andre Young) and Interscope Geffen A&M chairman Jimmy Iovine announced they were giving a very generous $70 million to the University of Southern California. The plan is to set up an entrepreneurship program in hopes of training young people who will create the next big tech thing. Personally, I hope the cash goes a long, long way in helping society, producing new jobs and providing a way for marginalized individuals to get a great education and make a significant contribution.
Now that the gift has been given and USC is hard at work preparing to open this program next fall with 25 students, my hopes for its success is also tempered with another way of looking at the gift itself. James F. Lawrence, editorial page editor for the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle (and republished in USA Today) was the first (that I know of) to point out the other side of this coin:
So after raking in untold millions over the past decade by helping create a billion dollar cultural machine that degrades women and celebrates murder, mayhem and materialism, Dre and Iovine are now giving back. Whoopee!
Lawrence digs even deeper:
But can money really repair the broken lives of young people who bought into the culture that gives ‘street cred’ for going to prison or jail, fathering children with no intent of supporting them and retaliating violently against anyone who might so much as look at you crossed-eyed? Not nearly enough.
Lawrence raises some very worthwhile points. Yes, $70 million is substantial. Yes, the gift may inspire wonderful innovation someday. But what about all the “broken lives?” How much to repair just one? How many will never feel they can be more than a drain on society?
Here at Plugged In, we keep records of the many gangsta rap-related murders that have occurred. I detailed a number of them in my book, Plugged-In Parenting. Ask a parent of one of those homicide victims if they believe the gift to USC was worth the cultural downgrading? I’m pretty sure I know how they’d answer.
Building upon Lawrence’s argument, I’d add: How much has it cost society to build the additional jails and house additional inmates who bought into the gangsta lie? How much has it cost society to pay the welfare bill for those abandoned mothers who were left pregnant and alone to raise their child(ren)? How much has it cost society to pay the medical bills for those who were retaliated against just because they, as Lawrence writes, “look[ed] at [the perpetrator] cross-eyed?”
Suppose that a purveyor of child pornography had given a $70 million gift to USC, knowing the money came from the filmed sexual abuse of young boys and girls? Would the funds be perceived differently? Would the university even accept the money? I submit that the Dre/Iovine funds are similarly tainted and as such, perhaps the $70 million would have been better spent if directed to healing broken lives. Not to mention given with an apology. Your thoughts?
Recent Comments