Looking for genuine discourse re:Jay-Z/NBA

[[size/HUGE] fixed [/size]]

Did you catch the article on the decline of the Left published recently in Harper's? That'd be a cool place to start.

I'm definitely not going to bash you publicly.

@OB

btw, we agree on a lot of stuff. I'm probably to the left of where you are. I respect that you bring your sense of things consistently. Yeah, so there definitely wouldn't be any bashing. The blind spots I mentioned have more to do with the conceits of the "Left" than with your particular positions.

 

[One Brow]

Did you catch the article on the decline of the Left published recently in Harper's? That'd be a cool place to start.

I'm definitely not going to bash you publicly.

The article by Adolph Reed Jr.? I read a summary and an opening paragraph, but I'm not a subscriber so can't see the rest. I certainly didn't see anything I would disagree with. Clinton and Obama were/are centrists, and the left is moribund. No argument here.

 

[One Brow]

@OB

btw, we agree on a lot of stuff. I'm probably to the left of where you are. I respect that you bring your sense of things consistently. Yeah, so there definitely wouldn't be any bashing. The blind spots I mentioned have more to do with the conceits of the "Left" than with your particular positions.

Well, I'd be one of the last people to argue that the left is any bastion of reason or clear thinking.

 

[[size/HUGE] fixed [/size]]

Well, I'd be one of the last people to argue that the left is any bastion of reason or clear thinking.

cool. I'll pay more attention to your posts, because it seems like I have unfairly skewed you into the center.

Yep, that's the article. Well worth the read.

 

[[size/HUGE] fixed [/size]]

Don't let him troll you Stoked. He's big on pretending he wants to have a conversation but blaming other people on why he cant, because it has to be on his terms. He is like Emperor Kuzko and we have thrown off his groove. We don't speak his language, we don't do things his way, so it's our fault if the conversation doesn't go the way he wants it to. He needs a stage to show people how smart he is.

Ok, done giving him a hard time for this post.
Really though it's more like we both want the other to at least acknowledge we understand the other persons take but both feel like we have to be right, and we tend to naturally push each others buttons, then once it gets going we escalate it because we are competitive and have to "win" or get the last word in, so rarely does anything useful come of it.
I don't have anything against /size, I just think we communicate differently and see things differently. No biggie imo. One year, we may even be able to have a decent conversation in a thread. I'm holding out hope. It might start to happen when I stop tossing stones at him and giving him crap. I think I did it once for a day or so.. but it might be because I didn't log in or post.

You can go back to the 10th page +/- and read my posts. You'll see that you're wrong.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

You can go back to the 10th page +/- and read my posts. You'll see that you're wrong.

Read again where you entered the thread and still see your tone and approach as the same.
We were discussing things, you felt what I thought was important to the topic was useless, I defended it and still think you don't get the nuance of what I was saying.
You got your bristles up and basically told me to talk about what you feel is important to the topic or shut up.
I decided at that point you didn't want to truly understand what I was trying to say and just wanted to pound your point and show everyone how much smarter than me you are as opposed to actually understanding what I was getting at.

You still think you were the only kind and rational one in the conversation and that I was just a jerk to you when you were being completely nice to me. I should be honored that you deigned to speak to me even if it was in dismissing and or attacking me and my posts so when I defended my stance and point you of course were offended that I would lash back at you even though you were the first to throw a punch.

I'm sure your version of reality paints you as the victim.
Feel free to feel that.
I was honestly having the dialogue with you trying to understand what you were saying and even trying at first to not match/respond to your veiled and not so veiled jabs.

Don't bother responding to my PM. I don't need a response any more.

 

[PearlWatson]

Well, I'd be one of the last people to argue that the left is any bastion of reason or clear thinking.

You are a caricature of the left, so you must be having an out of body experience.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

This is a relevant and interesting read.

ESPN article on Jordan <--- Link

I'm curious about the tone of the book if Jordan played no part in it.

The tipping point, Lazenby wrote, came in 1977, when a girl at his school called him the N-word.

"So I threw a soda at her," Jordan said in a 1992 interview with Playboy magazine, the details of which were written about in Lazenby's book. "I was really rebelling. I considered myself a racist at the time. Basically, I was against all white people."

"As an owner, I'm obviously disgusted that a fellow team owner could hold such sickening and offensive views," Jordan said in a statement. "... As a former player, I'm completely outraged.

"There is no room in the NBA -- or anywhere else -- for the kind of racism and hatred that Mr. Sterling allegedly expressed. I am appalled that this type of ignorance still exists within our country and at the highest levels of our sport. In a league where the majority of players are African-American, we cannot and must not tolerate discrimination at any level."

Just two quotes, read the article for more context.
Plenty of years between the two, and plenty of change.

 

[PearlWatson]

We had a very public trial with substantial race based overtones in the last 12ish months here in the United States where outright killing a black kid for no real reason went unpunished.

If you've ever studied the history of lynching for example, a big chunk of the ritual of it was that everyone in town knew who did the lynching.

No real reason except the pothead was slamming the other guys head into the pavement.

The KKK was the terrorist wing of the Democrat party so of course everyone knew who was doing the lynching.

 

[[size/HUGE] fixed [/size]]

I'm sure your version of reality paints you as the victim.

Link?

Don't bother responding to my PM. I don't need a response any more.

I never got one

 

[Jazz Spazz]

Dude, the record is pretty easy to access... because teh internet saves things... scroll back through the pages of this thread and you'll see one of us get unnecessarily (and unintentionally) provoked (hint: you) and you'll see the other one trying to engage the board in conversation.

just a thought here:

person1 says: we need a robust historical account of racism in order to account for it's enduring effects and to do our best at correcting them.

person2 says: Forget historical context. Let's step back and "rationally" look at how inconsistent/hypocritical these corrective measures are! (e.g. affirmative action)

person3 says: let me be the mild guy in the middle. Let's find a happy balance and take a medium-length historical perspective on this issue.



OK... person3 is the least helpful person in this exchange because he accepts person2's premise for limiting the historical context of the discussion. He isn't balancing the conversation; instead, he tips the conversation in favor of person2 (and this issue is perhaps the most critical one for person1). The most irritating political affectation in the world today is the person who espouses a false balance.

This is a direct jab at something I said, and you have my stance incorrect as to person3 in your scenario. When I changed your scenario to what I saw it as you took offense to it. Keep in mind there were zero jabs from me in your direction. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Serious question here (I'm not just trying to be provocative, even though it sounds that way):

What value is there in asking someone to limit the historical sense they have of a concept?

This move is either saying, "your history is wrong" or "your history is right in many respects, but we can't handle too much context... the only hope we have is through parsimonious accounts."

One thing is certain, this move does nothing to enrich our understanding of the concept under investigation. The only value I can find is the precedence it gives to a certain method for evaluating things. This method has nothing to do with the concept; rather, it is a moral process of measuring things that comes in from elsewhere and starts governing the discussion.

Next srs question:
What value is there in this person interceding in this debate with his "general theory of evaluation"? What do we get out of this??

Both of the bold parts are direct jabs at what you think is wrong about my approach to the topic and what I feel is an important point in the discussion.
You attempt to completely dismiss it while stating my stance incorrectly at the same time. You seem to have zero interest in actually understanding what I am getting at, but say how I go about it is all wrong...... because part of what I say has to do with how we go about it? How hypocritical is that.

Link?

[size/HUGE] ego [/size] <--- Here's your link

[QUOTE='[size/HUGE] fixed [/size]
I never got one[/QUOTE]

Strange

I'm done with you on this.
Respond if you want to, but don't expect a response after that. I'm 50/50 on how entertaining dragging this out more will be.

 

[moevillini]

kudos to Kicky on a wonderful and heartfelt post above...


anecdotal story based on my observations, perhaps the discussion has moved past this point, but I thought I'd mention it anyhow...

among African-American high schoolers, those who are light-skinned and known to be biracial are subject to little or no ridicule or teasing by other African-American teens, while those who are light-skinned but known to have two black parents are subject to more ridicule and teasing. That's less the case when the child and both parents are similar in skin-tone.