Racism, David Sterling the racist owner, and the NBA

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,048
963
118
Happiness Assassin said:
Free speech and consequence free speech are not the same thing.
I don't know if it changes the situation and I feel kind of dumb for not including it in the OP (I will edit it in) but the tapes were of a private conversation Sterling and his mistress had. These were not publicly stated opinions. It's still unknown why these tapes exist (some feel the mistress recorded them for blackmail purposes and others have stated that Sterling records his own conversations for his memory is hurting) but I thought I should throw that in there.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,048
963
118
Chaosritter said:
Matter of fact: he didn't say anything racist.
What?

How in the world could one argue that the things he said on that tape are not racist? Hell, the samples I gave are just samples of what he said (there's more) and there are racist things there...

He specifically asked his mistress to not bring black people to his games. He asked her not to have pictures taken with black people on public display.

I guess I'm confused as to how these are not racist. How are these not him saying that he is better than they are because of the color of their skin?
 

Helmholtz Watson

New member
Nov 7, 2011
2,503
0
0
King Whurdler said:
The piece of language I used was literally nothing but a descriptor I chose to use at the time.
As I stated prevously, it was a "descriptor" that wasn't relevant to the conversation because nobody said anything about the majority of the groups you listed. The only people that were mentioned were homosexual people.

King Whurdler said:
And I'm sorry, if you feel my 'hostility' is 'unprovoked,' but I wanted to put my foot down definitively and end all conversation before it started. Which I think is entirely within my rights given the fact that people on this site always seem to be jumping down the throats of anyone who even bothers, and apparently I was unable to prevent anyway. Unfortunate.
Such actions seems counterproductive to do, seeing as you seemed to know from the beginning that your choice of "descriptor" was going to bring attention to a post that would otherwise not receive such responses.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,048
963
118
Chaosritter said:
Well, that's the fine difference.

He said he doesn't want them around. Not because he they're an inferior race, not because they all share the same negative characteristics, not because he wants to keep his environment racially pure or anything in the like. He didn't enforce or punish anything either, he merely expressed his discomfort.

The racist part is merely being interpreted. And while there is certainly room for speculation, there is no definite racism to be found.

Here's a good example for actual racism:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/no-whites-allowed-diversity-event-n52496

Oddly enough this didn't cause a notable uproar, unlike something a rich, old white man said in private.
Eh...I'd be hard pressed to find any reason he wouldn't want black people around that wasn't racist but I suppose you are technically correct. Given his past (Damn it! Something else I neglected to put in my OP. I'll edit it in. I'm bad at this D:), it'd be awfully hard to convince me that he's NOT a racist.
 

shoddyworksucks

New member
Feb 11, 2012
20
0
0
As a fan of the NBA, I think some things need to be made clear:

1) As previously mentioned, Donald Sterling owns a franchise. He is 1/30 of the league, and as such he can't be allowed to torpedo it. Also, the NBA owner's constitution includes a process for forcing an owner to sell their team, and having the league step in to deal with a team is not uncommon. MLB stepped in to deal with the McCourt-Dodgers situation, and the NBA bought the New Orleans Pelicans from George Shinn and his co-owner, most likely due to their finances and behind-the-scenes sexual harassment case and desire to move the team from New Orleans to Oklahoma City.

2) This situation is not being played out in a court of law. Whether the audio recordings were done illegally or not, as soon as they became public, the NBA had to do something about it. While Sterling is free to have his own opinions about race, despicable though they might be, he's not free from public backlash or business ramifications.

3) Many sources have stated that the players were ready to boycott games if Sterling wasn't dealt with. If this had occurred, and the NBA season ended with no champion for the first time in its history, it would have had a devastating effect on the NBA's financial future a la the 1994 MLB lockout. While I often bristle at the immediate call to fire people when a story like this drops, I also sympathize with the players here. If you're an athlete working for Donald Sterling, not only do you now know that your owner is a racist, but also that you've been putting money in his pockets the entire time you've played for him. So not only does the NBA lose it's playoffs, it's a possibility that the following season would have been effected by a lockout until Sterling was forced out. Lost revenue would have severely hurt small-market teams, and the Clippers franchise would have been toast, since no black player would be willing to play for them, and no other player would want to be seen as a racist for choosing to play for the team. The choice to force Sterling to sell (it's not like he won't be financially compensated for the team) was and is the NBA's ONLY option, since letting him keep the team and forcing a player walk-out would have been seen by the public as the NBA supporting a racist old billionaire instead of its players and fans.

Any Southern California sports fan has known for decades that Donald Sterling is human scum. I have a hard time feeling sorry for a guy who is going to lose his NBA franchise due to his own egotism and rampant stupidity.
 

IceForce

Is this memes?
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
2,384
16
13
King Whurdler said:
Fantastic, another one that just can't tolerate wrapping his head around something as simple as inclusion...
We already have a term that can be used to make everyone feel included, it's "human being".
King Whurdler said:
Well, even if google doesn't recognize it, I, and several of my peers have used it. I've also read several things that have used that acronym specifically, so there.
Ah yes, anecdotal evidence. The best kind of evidence.

Using a fallacy and ending your post with "So there", usually means you've lost the debate.
 

zumbledum

New member
Nov 13, 2011
673
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
I don't know how prevalent this news story is across the pond but I imagine that if you are an American and have not lived in a cave for the last few days you are aware of this story:

Donald Sterling, owner of the NBA Team Los Angeles Clippers, was recorded on tape saying some very not nice things about black people...
Dont see hes done anything wrong tbh.

Sure you might find his views offensive and wrong but freedom of speech means just that , 1st amendment cuts both ways.

these comments were private. they sound baited. someone got paid to record them so its not exactly balanced journalism is it?
 

cthulhuspawn82

New member
Oct 16, 2011
321
0
0
This is a racism case? I just caught some snippets from the news and though it was a murder trial. When you here people say things like "We will do a full investigation, and prosecute this to the fullest extent." you tend to assume they are talking about a criminal case.

Anyway, the moral of the story is, don't say anything over the phone. This wouldn't be the first multimillion dollar empire to crumble because of words spoken in a "private" conversation. Free speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences, it means you wont be persecuted for expressing your beliefs. Unless you consider multimillion dollar fines and being forced out of your job persecution. Its only persecution when the government does it, when the citizens do it its the free market.
 

zyoto12

New member
Aug 23, 2009
155
0
0
King Whurdler said:
Ed130 The Vanguard said:
King Whurdler said:
as a member of the LGBTTQQAI2S community, I totally understood the logic.
What?

Even plugging LGBTTQQAI2S into Google did not bring up any relevant results, is this a spelling mistake?
Nope, it stands for: 'Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Transsexual, Queer, Questioning, A-Sexual, Intersex, 2-Spirit.'

But I'm not having this discussion with you, so drop it.
Sorry, but you used it wrong. It's actually LGBTTQQAI2SWTFBBQGTAVMLKLOTRFDRCODWOWDOTADS23DSDDRAARPNHLNAMBLANFLMLGDNDKOTHTORMTG.
 

EternallyBored

Terminally Apathetic
Jun 17, 2013
1,434
0
0
zumbledum said:
tippy2k2 said:
I don't know how prevalent this news story is across the pond but I imagine that if you are an American and have not lived in a cave for the last few days you are aware of this story:

Donald Sterling, owner of the NBA Team Los Angeles Clippers, was recorded on tape saying some very not nice things about black people...
Dont see hes done anything wrong tbh.

Sure you might find his views offensive and wrong but freedom of speech means just that , 1st amendment cuts both ways.

these comments were private. they sound baited. someone got paid to record them so its not exactly balanced journalism is it?
To borrow another poster's schtick with these threads, there's a line about your arguement being particularly poor if the only support you've got is that it is not strictly illegal in the government's eyes, which is the only thing invoking freedom of speech means, that the government isn't going to put a stop to it.

The first amendment also gives us the right to freedom of expression and association, which so many people seem to forget to mention when talking about speech. Conveniently, the NBA is using those rights to disassociate themselves from Mr. Sterling, and they are using contract law to fine him for his remarks and using those same laws to ban him from attending games for a team that he owns. They will likely use those laws to force him to sell the team if the situation becomes bad enough (they might not force the issue, I have no idea how the situation will play out in the end).

So yeah, the first amendment cuts both ways, which the NBA is exercising to rid themselves of their association to Mr. Sterling, they are also using their legal contractual powers to punish him for his speech. Because the NBA isn't the government, so they can restrict free speech however they want.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
Is it the same as the Mozilla problem?
Of course not. He's black, not gay. We (as a culture) are marginally okay with them and thus won't tolerate such stateme....

Oh, you meant is there parity between the actual situations.

Well, both are private organisations making business decisions for the sake of their business, one doing so for the sake of their reputation as an LGBT-friendly, progressive company and the other selling its product predominantly on the backs of black people and to a market with a large black population, so in that sense, yes.

But then, fewer people are going to defend his words as being his own opinion or cultural values, so that's not the same. Again, blacks have sort of become normalised. I mean, we still argue the need for guns to protect ourselves from the scary bogeyman of the black criminal, to the point where shooting an unarmed and retreating black kid can be considered self defense, but we won't vote to keep them from marrying because that's no longer a cultural thing.

Which is confusing, because you'd think "free speech" still applied if it applies to hating gays. But hey.

Phrozenflame500 said:
Again, I feel the need to post this comic.
Yes, but you forgot this handy chart: