Yea, from my vague recollection of history, I’m not sure they let slaves unionize, either.
I’d be far more interested whether there has ever been a trace of racism in the operations or management of the Clippers. The owner may have let loose some vile comments in a heated argument. But, did that in any way effect the Basketball team’s operations? A real racist would have hired managers and other personnel that shared similar views. From what I’ve seen, racists like to hang out together and support each others abhorrent world view.
See Elgin Baylor’s suit against the Clips and Sterling, alleging, among other things, racial discrimination and wrongful termination from his GM position. The jury didn’t buy it—maybe because Baylor was awful at his job—but discovery was illuminating as to Sterling’s prior racist comments.
As far as I recall, Baylor was a horrible GM. The Clippers had maybe two winning seasons under his tenure. I would think keeping him as a GM for 22 seasons was pretty damn loyal. His claim for age and race was rejected by a 12-0 vote too. Even after all that, the Clippers asked that he stay on in another job.
It’s not loyalty, it’s apathy. He didn’t care if the team was any good.
This. His tenure as owner has been a perfect example of this. The first two decades of his ownership were pretty much him staying profitable at all costs regardless of how the team was doing.
Yup. If didn’t change until the last couple of years, and even then they made at least one super-dumbass trade and they pretty much lucked into Chris Paul. For 20 odd years they lost lots of games, missed the playoffs, and Sterling made money and got to be a member of the big shot sports team owner club.
The fact remains that Sterling hired Elgin Baylor at a time when very few sports franchises were giving top jobs like that to black men. Why doesn’t Sterling get any credit for HIRING Baylor in the first place?
And if Sterling was such an awful man to work for, why did Baylor keep the job so long? Why did he hang around for 20 years, and complain about Sterling’s alleged racism only AFTER he’d been fired for doing a horrible job?
Sterling hired a black man for a top job and kept him around years too long. FOr THAT, he got sued.
You fuck one goat…
Putting up with racism to keep a job is not proof that there wasn’t racism. Non-whites have a lot of difficult decisions to make when they’re subject to racist behavior. Most people can’t afford to stand on principle, especially considering that but can get you blacklisted.
No one gets credit for acts of non-racism. That’s the least you can do.
“I’m not racist. I’ve got black friends”.
Seriously? Defending Sterling by bringing up Baylor’s long tenure is exactly this weak argument that’s now cliched and mostly a joke.
And yet it’s being used in earnest. Un-fragging-believable. It’s like we’ve gone back in time to a different era.
Sterling hiring a black GM and keeping him on doesn’t earn him any credit, anymore than his hiring of black players (and not wanting to hire white players) earns him any credit. While NOT hiring any black personnel is certainly grounds for censure, that doesn’t make hiring any at all a creditable event. It’s the bare minimum of what we have expected in society for some decades now.
ETA: I’ve known racists who have gotten along with individual black people well. Even for decades. What is that even supposed to prove? Sterling had a girlfriend of color. So what? Racists aren’t caricatures. They can and do hold racist beliefs even if they “magnanimously” also believe there are exceptions to a particular race’s inferiority. In a way, that’s actually worse. They can look at brilliant or inspiring examples from any race and say “That’s a good 'un. Shame the rest of them aren’t like that”.
I’ve had a lot of black friends who were racists, and not just against whites. Blacks too.
I don’t really care, and it’s irrelevant in this situation anyway.
“But the other guy also did <bad thing>” doesn’t often work as an excuse for 5 year olds. It simply sounds ridiculous when applied to an 80 year old man.
I don’t even know why other people’s racism is relevant here, anyway. It doesn’t excuse Sterling’s comments in particular, even if there’s room for a (separate) debate on racism and race relations in America.
Yeah, pay a guy enough money and he should have to out up with any old offense to his dignity. That’s the bottom line, eh?
Why can’t you put up with comments about your tits, woman? You’re being paid a lot to punch keys on a computer? I should have it so easy.
And typical minimization of the players themselves – just playing a child’s game – why aren’t they grateful WHY AREN’T THEY GRATEFUL???
See, racism penetrates American society, to a large extent in subtler forms than Sterlibg’s racism.
See, no. I understand what you’re saying here. And no, getting paid millions doesn’t mean that NBA players should tolerate any offense to their dignity. And Airman Doors, near as I can tell, didn’t ask why the players weren’t grateful.
He simply said that the NBA is not modern day slavery, which it is not. It is imperfect and affected by racism - though I’d suggest maybe somewhat less so than some other industries - but it is not equivalent to, or even comparable to, slavery.
Now this has got to hurt: Donald Sterling Has Also Been Banned For Life By Nevada’s Bunny Ranch
Talk about hitting below the belt.
Sure there’s some hyperbole, but it is not entirely irrelevant. It is a situation in which black performers are owned by rich white men. There are definite parallels. No one is saying that the NBA is exactly like slavery but there are a lot of factors that make it comparable, especially because whenever players start agitating over something, a bunch of people react by telling them how grateful they should be for what they’re given and what they’re allowed to do. It’s so obvious in the discussions about collegiate athletics.
I have no idea what Roundabout thinks he is saying, and after all it was a drive-by. The comparison is dumb because nobody ends up in the NBA unless they choose to be there, and the players are very well compensated for their labor. It’s not accurate to say guys like Donald Sterling own the players. They own the teams. They are the player’s employers. When you dig into the details and the attitudes of people like Sterling, there are some comparisons you can make, but in general it’s just daft. It’s a different story when we’re talking about the NCAA, where the players get very little for their labor.
This is just… not true. Unless I’m owned by the people who sign my checks, which… I am not.