RANGER AGAINST WAR: Politically-Correct Bullies <

Wednesday, May 14, 2014

Politically-Correct Bullies

I'm just a soul whose intentions are good,
Oh Lord, please, don't let me be misunderstood 
--Please Don't Let me Be Misunderstood, 
The Animals  

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
 Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold 
--The Second Coming, W. B. Yeats

The outrage du jour in the comminteriat is the outed racial bigotry of Los Angles Clippers owner Donald Sterling. Sterling is now doing the requisite penance on his media rounds, insisting he is no racist. 

He is doing the walk of shame because the National Basketball Association Commissioner Adam Silver has moved to force Sterling to sell his NBA franchise. This is all very understandable on one level as Silver and Sterling are both Jewish, and there is nothing that says you are an American patriot if you are Jewish like forsaking one of your brethren (or better, the State of Israel).

Surely we are not a post-racial society. The U.S. is post-Civil Rights and the enforcement of those equalizing statutes, but the law may not operate on our minds -- our preferences and perceptions. While some may feel that an Orwellian sort of mind reaming might help maters, we are not yet there. 

What about Sterling's right to privacy? "Under California law, all parties involved have to consent to the recording of private remarks. Even bigots." 

What we are is a contentious society that knows how to come out slugging. We have our petty social networking platforms on which to disgorge our bile, or in a national publication if we are a bigger dog. The silent majority doesn't participate and just wants chips and dip and to watch a ball game.

The last civil rights frontier is gay rights, and the liberals are coming out slugging, there, too -- as though the enforcement of gay marriage will make our society a more civil one. But we in the United States have a strong division between Church and State, and forcing the Church to perform a rite against its dogma is just wrong.

Of course all should be entitled to a civil union with their beloved, even objektophiles like USAF veteran Erika Eiffel. All people in committed relationship should be afforded the dignity to do so, and to enjoy the respect of their state's rights as a couple; state-recognized civil unions meet that bar.

But pugilist liberals are trying to hose down differences that do not please them, and to force acceptance of said differences. In the case of gay marriage, this would be a rupture of the protection afforded by the Church-State separation, and an enforced annihilation of Church doctrine.

This misbegotten crusading gives them a purpose, and a rationale for hiving at Starbucks amongst their fellows. But this coercion is not in line with our Constitution's First Amendment, and freedom of speech and freedom of religion. The Fifth and 14th Amendments guarantee of equal liberty is only binding on the state and state employees. Constitutionally-speaking, everyone else is free to discriminate.

And for every push, there is a push back. The result is in an even more riven society, one which is already dangerously factionalized. Amongst the latest falls was the forced resignation of Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich after it was outed that he contributed $1,000 to a group supporting heterosexual marriage (which is to say, marriage.)

As an aside: Sorry women, but your day of equality has passed. Amusing in a slightly horrific way are the advertisements over the years for various household appliances-as-gifts for the married woman ("There need be no doubt in your mind as to what to give a lady ..."). The June Cleaver-like women are beaming in their cheery half-aprons, ready to do your bidding if you'll only bestow that new chrome appliance upon them.

But wouldn't we be appalled if the woman was black, with a rag tied around her head? The above ads says, "Merry Christmas. I'll be over for breakfast!" Just like that, the house frau is expected to perform. The Equal Rights Amendment could not muster enough votes to pass in 1972, and women still earn 77 cents for every dollar that a man does.

Interestingly, Mrs. Donald Sterling is calling the NBA sexist forcing her forfeiture of her 50% share of the Los Angeles Clippers if her husband does. Her voice as the little lady is very small, and shall be a footnote to history.

Gays are on top now, and our society seems more chastened, or perhaps, more vitiated. Societies behave like metronomes or perhaps, circle games, like Yeats' widening gyre, which eventually breaks apart.

It will all be coming around again, 'til the game stops.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,


Blogger Ael said...

In Canada, we are really lucky to have had the USA go before us. We have learned from their mistakes.

For example, we guarantee rights to "individuals" and not "persons". This means corporations don't have free speech rights, etc.

Another example is that we have an explicit "it is ok to discriminate when trying to reduce discrimination" clause in our constitution.

We still have messy rights cases. For example, there is a religious sect (mostly farmers) who have longstanding objections to being photographed. However, the province recently mandated photographs on *all* driver licenses.

The supreme court ruled that it is within the provinces right to require photo id and that if the farmers want to drive motor vehicles on the highway, they need to get photographed (despite their religious objection).

Thursday, May 15, 2014 at 9:33:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger Lisa said...


I know you are referring to our legal ruling, rulings which almost always serve to benefit those in the highest economic echelon. But to a sane person not operating within the bounds of arcane legalese, a corporation is neither an "individual" nor a "person" (nor a papaya, a Tinker toy, etc.)

The ruling with the CAN farmers makes sense. To my mind, it is like the French ban on facial covering (Loi interdisant la dissimulation du visage dans l'espace public.) While the state may not dictate what you do privately, when you enter the public sphere protections / requirements may be imposed.

Thursday, May 15, 2014 at 12:48:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Grung_e_Gene said...


Yes Sterling was the victim of "eavesdropping". But, he's not filing charges against his "girlfriend".

Reportedly, when he drafted Corey Maggette, Sterling used to bring visitors (mainly women) to watch Maggette and others showering stating 'Look at those beautiful black bodies'.

And Sterling's beliefs, statements and actions have been well known and been tacitly accepted by the other NBA owners for decades.

But, now he's threatening the brand and bottom line and that is why the NBA Owners allowed Silver to move against Sterling.

So, you can blame this on Pugilist Liberals and Politically-Correct bullies but you're fooling yourself.

Thursday, May 15, 2014 at 3:59:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Lisa said...


None of Sterling's personal corruptions impinge upon my position; they are irrelevant to my topic.

You incorrectly state: "But, now he's threatening the brand and bottom line and that is why the NBA Owners allowed Silver to move against Sterling."

Not at all. Sterling has not threatened the "brand", which is predominately played by black males; surely the "bottom line" (=money) was never in question. People love them some b-ball.

No -- this is a case of a public lynching, in which a white man asked his mistress to not be photographed at games with black consorts. That is a private matter, perhaps one of feeling threatened vis-a-vis his age and condition.

Simply: the wrong colored guy was outed for holding prejudicial views, and is now being coerced to sell his ownership in a commodity (a team).

And most call that dispossession a good, because they are afraid of being tainted with the tag "racist".

In truth, this move to silence is Orwellian, and certainly not democratic.

Thursday, May 15, 2014 at 4:29:00 PM GMT-5  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home