Is It Okay For People To Be Racist Privately?

Nothing can be assured to stay private in this day, especially if you are the owner of a professional sports franchise.

 

Will they let him sell after the Clippers start hemorrhaging money or do the owners try to force him out before that?

 

Prospectively it's very hard. I'd say it's nigh impossible.

 

I mean, if someone can discriminate based on race as long as it is done so privately and discretely, why can't I discriminate based on their words and motives becoming known? I guess I don't get what the real problem is here, KB. No one (here anyway) is calling for the NBA or government to seize his franchise outright. The players, NBA, and/or fans pressuring him to sell is not equivalent. The public blasting him for his dehumanizing and anachronistic views is not equivalent. I feel like we are discussing a hypothetical situation that hasn't occurred.

 

They're obviously public now, but it was a private conversation. I was contrasting them with Cuban's comments. There's a clear distinction.

 

I actually think some on here have called for it. But even if they haven't, everyone and their cousin in the media is calling for it.

 

What are you getting at here?

 

That the conversation was illegally recorded and distributed by CA state law may be a point of concern for TMZ, the ex-prostitute (let's face it, that is what a person who sleeps with him even as he talks about her and her ancestors that way is), etc.

 

I fail to see why it would be okay for people to be privately racist (and by okay, apparently we mean it would be wrong to say anything or do anything against them) but not privately anti-racist of any kind.

 

I feel like I must have watched more ESPN than you the last few days. Because, again, everybody and their damn cousin is calling for his franchise to be seized outright.

 

I'm only saying that I think the NBA has the right to act in it's best interest. I'll leave the should they or shouldn't they up to them.

 

Are we going to play the strawman game again? Because I definitely haven't said anything about it being wrong to exercise one's opinion by not watching the Clippers or buying their tickets.

 

I guarantee you have watched more ESPN, because all I have been doing is working and sleeping these past 3 days.

I am uncomfortable with property being seized. If by seized they mean "forced to sell" and he gets the value of the franchise, I am less uncomfortable. If they just mean "take," that is theft. This isn't Soviet Russia (see Voldad? not a communist. Or at least not a Soviet).

 

I don't want to play the strawman game. It is beneath us. I am pleading pure ignorance. I did not realize the rhetoric had taken a "seize it" tone, thus my confusion.

 

Forced to sell.

 

I can see where my comments would be taken as a seize it argument. Let me clarify, I don't think the NBA should rob his team. I think they can punish him & ask him to step back some.

 

http://m.espn.go.com/general/story?storyId=6742381&city=losangeles&src=desktop

$48k for court side. He's got two season tickets. Even 4 rows up I bet that's $50k a year at least.

 

He's been a known racist for at least a decade.

 

Well, I am not as uncomfortable with that. It is a franchise that he agreed to terms to own. We don't know what the contract looks like for NBA franchise owners, it isn't public (heard that on the radio, anyway). Without knowing the sort of language there, it is hard to say. That the conversation was private and illegally recorded/distributed would seemingly make it dangerous to officially push him to sell. That being said, the franchise will be worth less in two years than it is now if he keeps it. Might be he is "convinced" to sell.

 

What happens when everyone knows you are forced to sell? This could cost him hundreds of millions. Not that I really care since he's slime, but where's the line?