Donald Sterling and Political Theory

[Ker_Thwap]

So, as a self proclaimed moderate, I was pleased with just about every aspect of how the NBA handled Donald Sterling. My question is, did the way you felt about his punishment challenge any of your political beliefs?

Here's how I see it. Liberals have more recently been all about education and reform of criminals, going to great lengths to ensure no criminal is falsely convicted, is given every possible right before trial and even after conviction, or punished more extremely because of personal emotions. The whole punishing people is barbaric deal because it's societies fault for failing to teach them. The whole surveillance of bad people is bad, even if it prevents a crime.

Any self proclaimed liberals feel like they've sold out a little bit to enjoy Sterling's discomfort? No guilt about denying him the opportunity to be educated? No concerns about ageism, and slapping down an old man with declining mental facilities. No concern about the rage replacing reason, as shown by the NAACP and the NBA in handing out their judgement. No worry about the rush to judgement?

It seems to me this is one of those events where the young idealists end up getting their way on a single issue, and as a result end up abandoning some of their earlier beliefs because certain circumstances now suit them. There are just events for each generation that push the idealists to the main stream. Like when the hippies got a taste of political and economic power.

[Allereli]

what the NBA does as a private organization is completely different from what the government does and constitutional rights, why are people so confused about this?

[Tgo01]

Let's not forget that Shaq is apparently going to get away with the way he humiliated someone with a disability.

[waywardgs]

I'm curious what your point is.

[Tgo01]

what the NBA does as a private organization is completely different from what the government does and constitutional rights, why are people so confused about this?

This doesn't address anything Ker_Thwap said though.

[Allereli]

Let's not forget that Shaq is apparently going to get away with the way he humiliated someone with a disability.

why don't you boycott the PC until he is banned?

[Tgo01]

why don't you boycott the PC until he is banned?

Why so hostile?

[cwolff]

So, as a self proclaimed moderate, I was pleased with just about every aspect of how the NBA handled Donald Sterling. My question is, did the way you felt about his punishment challenge any of your political beliefs?

Here's how I see it. Liberals have more recently been all about education and reform of criminals, going to great lengths to ensure no criminal is falsely convicted, is given every possible right before trial and even after conviction, or punished more extremely because of personal emotions. The whole punishing people is barbaric deal because it's societies fault for failing to teach them. The whole surveillance of bad people is bad, even if it prevents a crime.

Any self proclaimed liberals feel like they've sold out a little bit to enjoy Sterling's discomfort? No guilt about denying him the opportunity to be educated? No concerns about ageism, and slapping down an old man with declining mental facilities. No concern about the rage replacing reason, as shown by the NAACP and the NBA in handing out their judgement. No worry about the rush to judgement?

It seems to me this is one of those events where the young idealists end up getting their way on a single issue, and as a result end up abandoning some of their earlier beliefs because certain circumstances now suit them. There are just events for each generation that push the idealists to the main stream. Like when the hippies got a taste of political and economic power.

As someone who's also politically moderate but often accused of being liberal I will answer your question even though I don't totally understand it. It seems pretty loaded with some of your personal biases about what liberals are or are not.

Anywho, I'm glad that the NBA handled it the way they did. The only thing that's upsetting is to see people defend Mr. Sterling by saying he was set up, 1st amendment, the girl's a gold digger blah blah blah.

Racism is alive and well in this country and we all need to stamp it right the fuck out. That means putting people who are racist on the spot publicly, especially if it's a public figure who owns a billion dollar business. Guys like Bundy and Sterling or Paula Deen should be eviscerated in the media.

What is news is that none of them seems to know what they did wrong. They're bright shining examples of cultural conditioning with 0 personal responsibility for self improvement in this area. That's why they need to be outed in public and discussed. We'll never eradicate this type of conditioning until everyone realizes that it's not the status quo and it's not O.k.

[Tgo01]

That means putting people who are racist on the spot publicly

By whatever means necessary, am I right?!

That was like exactly Ker_Thwap's point.

Geezus. Why is everyone coming here to read this thread but apparently not even reading the original post?

[waywardgs]

By whatever means necessary, am I right?!

That was like exactly Ker_Thwap's point.

Geezus. Why is everyone coming here to read this thread but apparently not even reading the original post?

I was referring to your Shaq thing.