|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 24 2017 09:31 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 09:13 NewSunshine wrote:On September 24 2017 09:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Politics have ALWAYS been part and parcel with sports. If you've got a problem with that its time to stop watching sports. I would've thought all the ceremonies, anthems, and ads that are sprinkled into every major sporting event were pretty big tip-offs. The best part of the NFL controversy is that before 9/11 players were still in the god damn locker room when the Anthem was played. This is new fake outrage du jour. After 9/11 the military paid the NFL a bunch of money to have players on the field for the Anthem to drum up propaganda patriotism, it's all a sham. No one gave a flying fuck back in the day, it's crap. But Jackie Robinson was political, Muhammad Ali was political, Jesse Owens was political. Average people becoming part of the cultural elite whether through art or sport are going to speak up. They've lived the life in the streets, they know what it's like to be on the bottom, they know the system is fucked, they know racism, classism, and sexism exists. So of course they're going to use their platform to bring attention to the problems they lived. People are insane if they think they're ever going to shut up athletes and artists.
They also get to point to their favorite token black athlete, Jordan. Dude was best player, and still widely considered best play. Bigger than the NBA itself. But he refused to speak up because white people buy shoes too.
|
On September 24 2017 11:23 LegalLord wrote:
If entertainers want to go political, then I will treat them as political commentators rather than entertainers. If they are ok with that result then go for it.
That's a stupid opinion because all sports are political. Even if you choose to maintain the status quo, like the NFL, you are still being political.
Even if we look at basketball alone, we have many important political eras:
- In the 1960s, the Boston Celtics were crazy political in being one of the first teams to have majority black players. This was serious business back then.
- In the 1980s, the Bird-Magic rivalry very much exploited race to drive a wedge and drive marketing. Those old Converse ads very much exploited their race as much as their team to sell products.
- In the 1990s, there was intense discussion about sporting figures as role models and their impact on children. The most obvious is the discussion about Charles Barkley but behind that was also the discussion about the responsibility Jordan had for his rare/high priced shoe lineup that was literally getting people killed.
So saying that athletes should shut up and shit down is honestly an ignorant position. Everything around them is political and to expect them to not say anything about what's happening to them and around them is like telling a worker to not say anything when he's put into an uncomfortable position. Hakeem Olajuwon didn't try to release low priced sneakers for no reason.
Heck, David Robinson didn't actively flaunt his military career but the sheer fact that he was the league's most honourable player made him the best NBA spokesperson for the US military by default. Its likely because of David Robinson, and Gregg Popovich being a military man too, that the Spurs are one of the few NBA organisations to actively support the military. That's a heavily political action by the Spurs organisation but not one many people would bat an eye because military worship in the states is sort of the status quo.
|
More than a year after former Treasury secretary Jack Lew said Harriet Tubman would replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill, his successor seems much less sure about it.
In an interview with CNBC that aired Thursday, Steve Mnuchin was asked if he supports the switch. Mnuchin said, “It’s not something that I’m focused on at the moment.” He went on to suggest that the change will not be made — without explicitly saying so — by insisting that currency should only be altered for “security purposes.”
When CNBC’s Steve Liesman asked about the “cultural aspects” of choosing who appears on currency, Mnuchin deflected, “People have been on the bills for a long period of time. This is something we’ll consider. Right now we have a lot more important issues to focus on.”
nymag.com
Looks like Mnuchin might do some good for once.
|
On September 24 2017 12:26 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 09:31 OuchyDathurts wrote:On September 24 2017 09:13 NewSunshine wrote:On September 24 2017 09:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Politics have ALWAYS been part and parcel with sports. If you've got a problem with that its time to stop watching sports. I would've thought all the ceremonies, anthems, and ads that are sprinkled into every major sporting event were pretty big tip-offs. The best part of the NFL controversy is that before 9/11 players were still in the god damn locker room when the Anthem was played. This is new fake outrage du jour. After 9/11 the military paid the NFL a bunch of money to have players on the field for the Anthem to drum up propaganda patriotism, it's all a sham. No one gave a flying fuck back in the day, it's crap. But Jackie Robinson was political, Muhammad Ali was political, Jesse Owens was political. Average people becoming part of the cultural elite whether through art or sport are going to speak up. They've lived the life in the streets, they know what it's like to be on the bottom, they know the system is fucked, they know racism, classism, and sexism exists. So of course they're going to use their platform to bring attention to the problems they lived. People are insane if they think they're ever going to shut up athletes and artists. They also get to point to their favorite token black athlete, Jordan. Dude was best player, and still widely considered best play. Bigger than the NBA itself. But he refused to speak up because white people buy shoes too.
You speak for a typical recasting of Jordan's views. Because he wasn't activist in today's terms, you must denigrate him as a sellout for shoes. I think even if you're black, your life choices can be your own life choices, not denied your agency for making them because today's race-baiters wish you were someone else.
|
On September 24 2017 12:55 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +More than a year after former Treasury secretary Jack Lew said Harriet Tubman would replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill, his successor seems much less sure about it.
In an interview with CNBC that aired Thursday, Steve Mnuchin was asked if he supports the switch. Mnuchin said, “It’s not something that I’m focused on at the moment.” He went on to suggest that the change will not be made — without explicitly saying so — by insisting that currency should only be altered for “security purposes.”
When CNBC’s Steve Liesman asked about the “cultural aspects” of choosing who appears on currency, Mnuchin deflected, “People have been on the bills for a long period of time. This is something we’ll consider. Right now we have a lot more important issues to focus on.” nymag.comLooks like Mnuchin might do some good for once.
I'll cheer this voice of reason out of the Trump administration.
|
On September 24 2017 12:56 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 12:26 Gahlo wrote:On September 24 2017 09:31 OuchyDathurts wrote:On September 24 2017 09:13 NewSunshine wrote:On September 24 2017 09:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Politics have ALWAYS been part and parcel with sports. If you've got a problem with that its time to stop watching sports. I would've thought all the ceremonies, anthems, and ads that are sprinkled into every major sporting event were pretty big tip-offs. The best part of the NFL controversy is that before 9/11 players were still in the god damn locker room when the Anthem was played. This is new fake outrage du jour. After 9/11 the military paid the NFL a bunch of money to have players on the field for the Anthem to drum up propaganda patriotism, it's all a sham. No one gave a flying fuck back in the day, it's crap. But Jackie Robinson was political, Muhammad Ali was political, Jesse Owens was political. Average people becoming part of the cultural elite whether through art or sport are going to speak up. They've lived the life in the streets, they know what it's like to be on the bottom, they know the system is fucked, they know racism, classism, and sexism exists. So of course they're going to use their platform to bring attention to the problems they lived. People are insane if they think they're ever going to shut up athletes and artists. They also get to point to their favorite token black athlete, Jordan. Dude was best player, and still widely considered best play. Bigger than the NBA itself. But he refused to speak up because white people buy shoes too. You speak for a typical recasting of Jordan's views. Because he wasn't activist in today's terms, you must denigrate him as a sellout for shoes. I think even if you're black, your life choices can be your own life choices, not denied your agency for making them because today's race-baiters wish you were someone else.
Jordan was a sellout for shoes. While the validity in the "Republican buy shoes too" comment is mushy at best, it is 100% true that he was a sell-out for his corporate Nike brand by being as politically inactive as you could possibly be. He didn't get a reputation for being a cheap, selfish sociopath for no reason.
Its only relatively recently, as the owner of the Charlotte Hornets, that he's being more outspoken with regards to politics. But when he was still a Chicago Bull? Yeah, he was a pretty terrible person to just about everyone.
|
On September 24 2017 13:00 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 12:55 LegalLord wrote:More than a year after former Treasury secretary Jack Lew said Harriet Tubman would replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill, his successor seems much less sure about it.
In an interview with CNBC that aired Thursday, Steve Mnuchin was asked if he supports the switch. Mnuchin said, “It’s not something that I’m focused on at the moment.” He went on to suggest that the change will not be made — without explicitly saying so — by insisting that currency should only be altered for “security purposes.”
When CNBC’s Steve Liesman asked about the “cultural aspects” of choosing who appears on currency, Mnuchin deflected, “People have been on the bills for a long period of time. This is something we’ll consider. Right now we have a lot more important issues to focus on.” nymag.comLooks like Mnuchin might do some good for once. I'll cheer this voice of reason out of the Trump administration.
Does anyone honestly care who is on the 20? I mean Jackson was a horrible excuse for a human being but half the time I dont even remember who is on the 20. Is Harriet Tubman a better person then Jackson and probably better deserving to be on the bill? Yes to the first and maybe to the second, but I honestly do not care. I assume it has something to do with wanting to put a minority on money which I guess is a good gesture but its a pointless gesture so I dont care that it exists. Gestures dont fix anything they just make you feel good for awhile then you go back to all the problems you had before.
|
On September 24 2017 12:56 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 12:26 Gahlo wrote:On September 24 2017 09:31 OuchyDathurts wrote:On September 24 2017 09:13 NewSunshine wrote:On September 24 2017 09:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Politics have ALWAYS been part and parcel with sports. If you've got a problem with that its time to stop watching sports. I would've thought all the ceremonies, anthems, and ads that are sprinkled into every major sporting event were pretty big tip-offs. The best part of the NFL controversy is that before 9/11 players were still in the god damn locker room when the Anthem was played. This is new fake outrage du jour. After 9/11 the military paid the NFL a bunch of money to have players on the field for the Anthem to drum up propaganda patriotism, it's all a sham. No one gave a flying fuck back in the day, it's crap. But Jackie Robinson was political, Muhammad Ali was political, Jesse Owens was political. Average people becoming part of the cultural elite whether through art or sport are going to speak up. They've lived the life in the streets, they know what it's like to be on the bottom, they know the system is fucked, they know racism, classism, and sexism exists. So of course they're going to use their platform to bring attention to the problems they lived. People are insane if they think they're ever going to shut up athletes and artists. They also get to point to their favorite token black athlete, Jordan. Dude was best player, and still widely considered best play. Bigger than the NBA itself. But he refused to speak up because white people buy shoes too. You speak for a typical recasting of Jordan's views. Because he wasn't activist in today's terms, you must denigrate him as a sellout for shoes. I think even if you're black, your life choices can be your own life choices, not denied your agency for making them because today's race-baiters wish you were someone else.
I'm not sure if you know that was actually a quote (white people replaced with Republicans, which has controversial veracity and was claimed as a joke)?
But it's not something about just right now, people were saying he was choosing commerce of consciousness his whole career (though you probably never heard those people back then)
|
On September 24 2017 13:16 Adreme wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 13:00 Danglars wrote:On September 24 2017 12:55 LegalLord wrote:More than a year after former Treasury secretary Jack Lew said Harriet Tubman would replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill, his successor seems much less sure about it.
In an interview with CNBC that aired Thursday, Steve Mnuchin was asked if he supports the switch. Mnuchin said, “It’s not something that I’m focused on at the moment.” He went on to suggest that the change will not be made — without explicitly saying so — by insisting that currency should only be altered for “security purposes.”
When CNBC’s Steve Liesman asked about the “cultural aspects” of choosing who appears on currency, Mnuchin deflected, “People have been on the bills for a long period of time. This is something we’ll consider. Right now we have a lot more important issues to focus on.” nymag.comLooks like Mnuchin might do some good for once. I'll cheer this voice of reason out of the Trump administration. Does anyone honestly care who is on the 20?
Yes.
|
On September 24 2017 13:16 Adreme wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 13:00 Danglars wrote:On September 24 2017 12:55 LegalLord wrote:More than a year after former Treasury secretary Jack Lew said Harriet Tubman would replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill, his successor seems much less sure about it.
In an interview with CNBC that aired Thursday, Steve Mnuchin was asked if he supports the switch. Mnuchin said, “It’s not something that I’m focused on at the moment.” He went on to suggest that the change will not be made — without explicitly saying so — by insisting that currency should only be altered for “security purposes.”
When CNBC’s Steve Liesman asked about the “cultural aspects” of choosing who appears on currency, Mnuchin deflected, “People have been on the bills for a long period of time. This is something we’ll consider. Right now we have a lot more important issues to focus on.” nymag.comLooks like Mnuchin might do some good for once. I'll cheer this voice of reason out of the Trump administration. Does anyone honestly care who is on the 20? I mean Jackson was a horrible excuse for a human being but half the time I dont even remember who is on the 20. Is Harriet Tubman a better person then Jackson and probably better deserving to be on the bill? Yes to the first and maybe to the second, but I honestly do not care. I assume it has something to do with wanting to put a minority on money which I guess is a good gesture but its a pointless gesture so I dont care that it exists. Gestures dont fix anything they just make you feel good for awhile then you go back to all the problems you had before.
Of all the racially-oriented issues one can focus on, this is really low on the list. The decision to not focus on it and instead work on other stuff, whatever it is, is sort of a non-story. Systemic racism, disproportionate impact of ostensibly neutral laws, lopsided police brutality, and the idea that you should just get in your lane and entertain us you pleb, but we promise it's really about the flag, all these seem like rather more imminent issues.
|
On September 24 2017 13:24 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 13:16 Adreme wrote:On September 24 2017 13:00 Danglars wrote:On September 24 2017 12:55 LegalLord wrote:More than a year after former Treasury secretary Jack Lew said Harriet Tubman would replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill, his successor seems much less sure about it.
In an interview with CNBC that aired Thursday, Steve Mnuchin was asked if he supports the switch. Mnuchin said, “It’s not something that I’m focused on at the moment.” He went on to suggest that the change will not be made — without explicitly saying so — by insisting that currency should only be altered for “security purposes.”
When CNBC’s Steve Liesman asked about the “cultural aspects” of choosing who appears on currency, Mnuchin deflected, “People have been on the bills for a long period of time. This is something we’ll consider. Right now we have a lot more important issues to focus on.” nymag.comLooks like Mnuchin might do some good for once. I'll cheer this voice of reason out of the Trump administration. Does anyone honestly care who is on the 20? I mean Jackson was a horrible excuse for a human being but half the time I dont even remember who is on the 20. Is Harriet Tubman a better person then Jackson and probably better deserving to be on the bill? Yes to the first and maybe to the second, but I honestly do not care. I assume it has something to do with wanting to put a minority on money which I guess is a good gesture but its a pointless gesture so I dont care that it exists. Gestures dont fix anything they just make you feel good for awhile then you go back to all the problems you had before. Of all the racially-oriented issues one can focus on, this is really low on the list. The decision to not focus on it and instead work on other stuff, whatever it is, is sort of a non-story. Systemic racism, disproportionate impact of ostensibly neutral laws, lopsided police brutality, and the idea that you should just get in your lane and entertain us you pleb, but we promise it's really about the flag, all these seem like rather more imminent issues.
Agreed.
To that point, it seems Trump's playing to his base may have unintended consequences.
I'm impressed at just how uninformed the arguments from the right have been on this...
On September 24 2017 13:35 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 13:13 bigmetazltank wrote:On September 24 2017 12:56 Danglars wrote:On September 24 2017 12:26 Gahlo wrote:On September 24 2017 09:31 OuchyDathurts wrote:On September 24 2017 09:13 NewSunshine wrote:On September 24 2017 09:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Politics have ALWAYS been part and parcel with sports. If you've got a problem with that its time to stop watching sports. I would've thought all the ceremonies, anthems, and ads that are sprinkled into every major sporting event were pretty big tip-offs. The best part of the NFL controversy is that before 9/11 players were still in the god damn locker room when the Anthem was played. This is new fake outrage du jour. After 9/11 the military paid the NFL a bunch of money to have players on the field for the Anthem to drum up propaganda patriotism, it's all a sham. No one gave a flying fuck back in the day, it's crap. But Jackie Robinson was political, Muhammad Ali was political, Jesse Owens was political. Average people becoming part of the cultural elite whether through art or sport are going to speak up. They've lived the life in the streets, they know what it's like to be on the bottom, they know the system is fucked, they know racism, classism, and sexism exists. So of course they're going to use their platform to bring attention to the problems they lived. People are insane if they think they're ever going to shut up athletes and artists. They also get to point to their favorite token black athlete, Jordan. Dude was best player, and still widely considered best play. Bigger than the NBA itself. But he refused to speak up because white people buy shoes too. You speak for a typical recasting of Jordan's views. Because he wasn't activist in today's terms, you must denigrate him as a sellout for shoes. I think even if you're black, your life choices can be your own life choices, not denied your agency for making them because today's race-baiters wish you were someone else. Jordan was a sellout for shoes. While the validity in the "Republican buy shoes too" comment is mushy at best, it is 100% true that he was a sell-out for his corporate Nike brand by being as politically inactive as you could possibly be. He didn't get a reputation for being a cheap, selfish sociopath for no reason. Its only relatively recently, as the owner of the Charlotte Hornets, that he's being more outspoken with regards to politics. But when he was still a Chicago Bull? Yeah, he was a pretty terrible person to just about everyone. Well, shit son, maybe I give African Americans in this country more opportunity to choose rather than be pushed into capitalist molds. Give blacks a little agency to control their own lives, don't treat Jordan as some slave to the Nike machine. Thanks a ton.
This is such trash posting. Even Jordan refers to it as he was "staying silent". It's not a mystery why, and I think most people know he made the choice to stay silent with Nike's encouragement.
Just stop with these terrible attempts at "turning the tables" or whatever you want to call it. They are giving me second hand embarrassment.
On September 24 2017 13:39 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 13:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 24 2017 12:56 Danglars wrote:On September 24 2017 12:26 Gahlo wrote:On September 24 2017 09:31 OuchyDathurts wrote:On September 24 2017 09:13 NewSunshine wrote:On September 24 2017 09:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Politics have ALWAYS been part and parcel with sports. If you've got a problem with that its time to stop watching sports. I would've thought all the ceremonies, anthems, and ads that are sprinkled into every major sporting event were pretty big tip-offs. The best part of the NFL controversy is that before 9/11 players were still in the god damn locker room when the Anthem was played. This is new fake outrage du jour. After 9/11 the military paid the NFL a bunch of money to have players on the field for the Anthem to drum up propaganda patriotism, it's all a sham. No one gave a flying fuck back in the day, it's crap. But Jackie Robinson was political, Muhammad Ali was political, Jesse Owens was political. Average people becoming part of the cultural elite whether through art or sport are going to speak up. They've lived the life in the streets, they know what it's like to be on the bottom, they know the system is fucked, they know racism, classism, and sexism exists. So of course they're going to use their platform to bring attention to the problems they lived. People are insane if they think they're ever going to shut up athletes and artists. They also get to point to their favorite token black athlete, Jordan. Dude was best player, and still widely considered best play. Bigger than the NBA itself. But he refused to speak up because white people buy shoes too. You speak for a typical recasting of Jordan's views. Because he wasn't activist in today's terms, you must denigrate him as a sellout for shoes. I think even if you're black, your life choices can be your own life choices, not denied your agency for making them because today's race-baiters wish you were someone else. I'm not sure if you know that was actually a quote (white people replaced with Republicans, which has controversial veracity and was claimed as a joke)? But it's not something about just right now, people were saying he was choosing commerce of consciousness his whole career (though you probably never heard those people back then) What are you on about. I responded on the topic of politics in sports and people thinking Jordan doesn't have basic moral agency, but was some slave of the white man. Make your case if you're big on some Topic B. Otherwise, let black people make their own life choices without trying to force them into your mold.
Yes this post is still trash. Jordan made his choices. This is just sad at this point.
|
On September 24 2017 13:13 bigmetazltank wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 12:56 Danglars wrote:On September 24 2017 12:26 Gahlo wrote:On September 24 2017 09:31 OuchyDathurts wrote:On September 24 2017 09:13 NewSunshine wrote:On September 24 2017 09:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Politics have ALWAYS been part and parcel with sports. If you've got a problem with that its time to stop watching sports. I would've thought all the ceremonies, anthems, and ads that are sprinkled into every major sporting event were pretty big tip-offs. The best part of the NFL controversy is that before 9/11 players were still in the god damn locker room when the Anthem was played. This is new fake outrage du jour. After 9/11 the military paid the NFL a bunch of money to have players on the field for the Anthem to drum up propaganda patriotism, it's all a sham. No one gave a flying fuck back in the day, it's crap. But Jackie Robinson was political, Muhammad Ali was political, Jesse Owens was political. Average people becoming part of the cultural elite whether through art or sport are going to speak up. They've lived the life in the streets, they know what it's like to be on the bottom, they know the system is fucked, they know racism, classism, and sexism exists. So of course they're going to use their platform to bring attention to the problems they lived. People are insane if they think they're ever going to shut up athletes and artists. They also get to point to their favorite token black athlete, Jordan. Dude was best player, and still widely considered best play. Bigger than the NBA itself. But he refused to speak up because white people buy shoes too. You speak for a typical recasting of Jordan's views. Because he wasn't activist in today's terms, you must denigrate him as a sellout for shoes. I think even if you're black, your life choices can be your own life choices, not denied your agency for making them because today's race-baiters wish you were someone else. Jordan was a sellout for shoes. While the validity in the "Republican buy shoes too" comment is mushy at best, it is 100% true that he was a sell-out for his corporate Nike brand by being as politically inactive as you could possibly be. He didn't get a reputation for being a cheap, selfish sociopath for no reason. Its only relatively recently, as the owner of the Charlotte Hornets, that he's being more outspoken with regards to politics. But when he was still a Chicago Bull? Yeah, he was a pretty terrible person to just about everyone.
Well, shit son, maybe I give African Americans in this country more opportunity to choose rather than be pushed into capitalist molds. Give blacks a little agency to control their own lives, don't treat Jordan as some slave to the Nike machine. Thanks a ton.
|
On September 24 2017 13:17 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 12:56 Danglars wrote:On September 24 2017 12:26 Gahlo wrote:On September 24 2017 09:31 OuchyDathurts wrote:On September 24 2017 09:13 NewSunshine wrote:On September 24 2017 09:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Politics have ALWAYS been part and parcel with sports. If you've got a problem with that its time to stop watching sports. I would've thought all the ceremonies, anthems, and ads that are sprinkled into every major sporting event were pretty big tip-offs. The best part of the NFL controversy is that before 9/11 players were still in the god damn locker room when the Anthem was played. This is new fake outrage du jour. After 9/11 the military paid the NFL a bunch of money to have players on the field for the Anthem to drum up propaganda patriotism, it's all a sham. No one gave a flying fuck back in the day, it's crap. But Jackie Robinson was political, Muhammad Ali was political, Jesse Owens was political. Average people becoming part of the cultural elite whether through art or sport are going to speak up. They've lived the life in the streets, they know what it's like to be on the bottom, they know the system is fucked, they know racism, classism, and sexism exists. So of course they're going to use their platform to bring attention to the problems they lived. People are insane if they think they're ever going to shut up athletes and artists. They also get to point to their favorite token black athlete, Jordan. Dude was best player, and still widely considered best play. Bigger than the NBA itself. But he refused to speak up because white people buy shoes too. You speak for a typical recasting of Jordan's views. Because he wasn't activist in today's terms, you must denigrate him as a sellout for shoes. I think even if you're black, your life choices can be your own life choices, not denied your agency for making them because today's race-baiters wish you were someone else. I'm not sure if you know that was actually a quote (white people replaced with Republicans, which has controversial veracity and was claimed as a joke)? But it's not something about just right now, people were saying he was choosing commerce of consciousness his whole career (though you probably never heard those people back then)
What are you on about. I responded on the topic of politics in sports and people thinking Jordan doesn't have basic moral agency, but was some slave of the white man. Make your case if you're big on some Topic B. Otherwise, let black people make their own life choices without trying to force them into your mold.
|
On September 24 2017 13:34 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 13:24 NewSunshine wrote:On September 24 2017 13:16 Adreme wrote:On September 24 2017 13:00 Danglars wrote:On September 24 2017 12:55 LegalLord wrote:More than a year after former Treasury secretary Jack Lew said Harriet Tubman would replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill, his successor seems much less sure about it.
In an interview with CNBC that aired Thursday, Steve Mnuchin was asked if he supports the switch. Mnuchin said, “It’s not something that I’m focused on at the moment.” He went on to suggest that the change will not be made — without explicitly saying so — by insisting that currency should only be altered for “security purposes.”
When CNBC’s Steve Liesman asked about the “cultural aspects” of choosing who appears on currency, Mnuchin deflected, “People have been on the bills for a long period of time. This is something we’ll consider. Right now we have a lot more important issues to focus on.” nymag.comLooks like Mnuchin might do some good for once. I'll cheer this voice of reason out of the Trump administration. Does anyone honestly care who is on the 20? I mean Jackson was a horrible excuse for a human being but half the time I dont even remember who is on the 20. Is Harriet Tubman a better person then Jackson and probably better deserving to be on the bill? Yes to the first and maybe to the second, but I honestly do not care. I assume it has something to do with wanting to put a minority on money which I guess is a good gesture but its a pointless gesture so I dont care that it exists. Gestures dont fix anything they just make you feel good for awhile then you go back to all the problems you had before. Of all the racially-oriented issues one can focus on, this is really low on the list. The decision to not focus on it and instead work on other stuff, whatever it is, is sort of a non-story. Systemic racism, disproportionate impact of ostensibly neutral laws, lopsided police brutality, and the idea that you should just get in your lane and entertain us you pleb, but we promise it's really about the flag, all these seem like rather more imminent issues. Agreed. To that point, it seems Trump's playing to his base may have unintended consequences. https://twitter.com/ShaunKing/status/911778824555302912
Well shit, I'm gonna be really excited to see this. It's heartening to see widespread, non-violent protest. It's just weird that the most recent example was of the Juggalos, of all things.
|
|
|
Bruh you gotta keep up, it's hundreds and I know my Seahawks leadership is standing with the players as has every team that's released a statement best I can tell.
But no, go ahead, it's a free market. If an owner/GM wants to fire his players for protesting, by all means, march that decision right out into the public square. See how that works out for you.
|
On September 24 2017 13:55 GreenHorizons wrote:Bruh you gotta keep up, it's hundreds and I know my Seahawks leadership is standing with the players as has every team that's released a statement best I can tell. But no, go ahead, it's a free market. If an owner/GM wants to fire his players for protesting, by all means, march that decision right out into the public square. See how that works out for you.
Once peaceful protest reaches a critical mass, and it becomes fashionable, people on the fence will turn too, and you'll basically just be left with people who firmly disagree with the idea being protested not joining in. It's a clean and useful dynamic, because it also helps the court of public opinion do its job, because the optics of not joining after it reaches a certain point don't look so good.
|
Never thought of Stevie wonder as political
|
On September 24 2017 13:57 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 13:55 GreenHorizons wrote:Bruh you gotta keep up, it's hundreds and I know my Seahawks leadership is standing with the players as has every team that's released a statement best I can tell. But no, go ahead, it's a free market. If an owner/GM wants to fire his players for protesting, by all means, march that decision right out into the public square. See how that works out for you. Once peaceful protest reaches a critical mass, and it becomes fashionable, people on the fence will turn too, and you'll basically just be left with people who firmly disagree with the idea being protested not joining in. It's a clean and useful dynamic, because it also helps the court of public opinion do its job, because the optics of not joining after it reaches a certain point don't look so good.
Much like the last few times we've been around this block it takes the "non-peaceful" protests to make space for the peaceful ones.
It was the people out in the streets screaming from the top of their lungs in the language of the unheard that forced the hands of those standing up now.
So while I empathize with the white moderate, I don't regret the discomfort that has leveraged them to action.
|
On September 24 2017 14:07 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2017 13:57 NewSunshine wrote:On September 24 2017 13:55 GreenHorizons wrote:Bruh you gotta keep up, it's hundreds and I know my Seahawks leadership is standing with the players as has every team that's released a statement best I can tell. But no, go ahead, it's a free market. If an owner/GM wants to fire his players for protesting, by all means, march that decision right out into the public square. See how that works out for you. Once peaceful protest reaches a critical mass, and it becomes fashionable, people on the fence will turn too, and you'll basically just be left with people who firmly disagree with the idea being protested not joining in. It's a clean and useful dynamic, because it also helps the court of public opinion do its job, because the optics of not joining after it reaches a certain point don't look so good. Much like the last few times we've been around this block it takes the "non-peaceful" protests to make space for the peaceful ones. It was the people out in the streets screaming from the top of their lungs in the language of the unheard that forced the hands of those standing up now. So while I empathize with the white moderate, I don't regret the discomfort that has leveraged them to action.
Oh of course not. The very thing that makes a protest uncomfortable to the oppressor is often the exact same thing that tries to normalize the oppression. Though the goal isn't to upset people, you can't really get results without making the people in power uncomfortable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
