nba racism : we see things differently

5
NBA Racism: We See Things Differently

Upload: alatenumo

Post on 02-May-2017

212 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: NBA Racism : We See Things Differently

NBA Racism: We See Things Differently

Page 2: NBA Racism : We See Things Differently

Mr. C. CaldwellFinancial Times1 Southwark BridgeLondonSE1 9HL

Dear Mr. Caldwell

NBA Racism: We See Things Differently

It’s been about nine months since I wrote a rejoinder to your article about Trayvon Martin, but once again I am compelled to write you another “We See Things Differently” letter in response to your article titled “The NBA's racism drama is more about money than morals” which was published in the May 3rd 2014 weekend edition of the Financial Times.

The central thesis of your article is, “It will be hard to discipline Sterling without ramifications for other basketball personalities.” You also argue that the punishment melted on Mr. Donald Sterling has more to do with money than morals as the NBA is a multi billion sports franchise and if an owner of a team has been found to make racist remarks, this could impact turnouts and revenue.

In referring to the discussion between Mr. Sterlings and Ms. Stiviano, which was relayed on TMZ’s website, you argue, “Offensive the audio is. But “hateful” is too strong a word.”  To support your premise you make reference to a former baseball owner who said eighteen years ago that Hitler was good in the beginning. While your statement that the audio is offensive is valid, however, your argument that the word “hateful” is not appropriate to describe the contents of the audio is flawed because it assumes if Mr. A says something more hateful than Ms. B, then what A has said is not hateful. Does this then mean that a person who says he wishes all Nigerian men dead has not said anything hateful because another person said   eighteen years earlier that he wished all Africans died?  

You then describe the contents of the audio recording as an “intimate quarrel” between two lovers and say, “Something is upsetting Mr. Sterling very much, but it is not black people – at least not primarily. It is the Molière-esque predicament of an 80-year-old man with a young companion he cannot control.” Perhaps, you may want to do some additional research on Mr. Sterling’s past and then you will realize that he has a phobia for black people or should I say non-whites – at least primarily.

In 2003, nineteen tenants of a property owned by Mr. Sterling filed a discrimination lawsuit against him, which was settled out of court in 2005. A year later, the US Justice Department sued Mr. Sterling for housing racial discrimination, which was settled in 2009 for $2.7m. Also in 2009, an ex employee sued Sterling for age and racial discrimination. From the testimony of witnesses in these cases, it is obvious that there was “something upsetting Mr. Sterling and it was primarily non-white people.” After all when a man says he needs to field a team of "poor black boys from the South playing for a white coach” is it not primarily about black people? When a man says to a property developer, “That’s because of all the blacks in this building, they smell, they’re not clean,” is it not primarily about black people? When a man tells the same property developer, “And it’s because of all of the Mexicans that just sit around and smoke and drink all day,” is it not primarily about non-white people? When a man says, “Is she one of those black people that stink? Just evict the bitch,” is it not primarily about black people?

Page 3: NBA Racism : We See Things Differently

Sir, when people in my community examine the audio recording, we also see that Mr. Sterling is upset only this time we think that it is primarily because of black people. As long as people in my community hear words like, “Yeah, it bothers me a lot that you want to promo … broadcast that you’re associating with black people,” we will always feel that it is about black people; as long as people in my community hear words like, “Then why are you taking pictures with minorities,” we feel always feel that it is about black people; as long as people in my community hear words like, “By walking and you’re perceived as either a Latina or a white girl. Why can’t you be walking publicly with black people? Why)? Is there a benefit to you?” we will always feel that it is about black people; as long as people in my community hear words like, “You can sleep with them (blacks). You can bring them (blacks) in; you can do whatever you want. The little I ask you is not to promote it on that and not to bring them (blacks) to my games,” we will always feel that it is about black people. I also suggest that you listen to the extended version of the audio recording, which contains an additional six minutes of recording, and hopefully you will see why your assertion that Mr. Sterling is not upset about black people – at least not primarily is incorrect.

While you acknowledge that “some” of Sterling’s characterizations are racist, you appear to trivialize what he has said by arguing that the issue of race did not come into the conversation until Ms. Stiviano mentioned it in the discussion. You note, “There is something stilted, oratorical and manipulative about almost everything Ms Stiviano says.”  You appear to be using the same logic you applied in your article about Trayvon Martin only this time you substitute the cause of the racist attack from Zimmerman’s bloodied head and torn clothes to Ms. Stiviano’s manipulation and rhetoric’s. For people in my community, the issue of Ms. Stiviano’s manipulative tendencies is of little relevance; what is of relevance is what Mr. Sterling said.

My community is appalled when it sees people shift the burden of blame. We scratch our heads when we see people like Donald Trump arguing that Mr. Sterling was set up by his “girlfriend from hell” or when we hear Rush Limbaugh say that Donald Sterling is in trouble because he did not donate enough money to President Barack Obama. Blaming Ms. Stiviano for Mr. Sterling’s racist outburst is like blaming a woman who has been raped because she was wearing a mini skirt or blaming the owner of a house whose house has been burgled because he did not install a secure locking system in the house.   

You also question the admissibility of the audiotape by noting, “One would not want to lean too heavily on it in a courtroom. Nothing Mr. Sterling said violates any laws. What made the audio a problem is it angered the NBA’s players.” The relevant issue is not what law Mr. Sterling did not violate, but which law did he violate.

For people in my community and me, we see two types of laws namely the legal law and a moral law. Because someone commits an acts that does not violate a legal law does not mean that the act is right. Having seen our ancestors go through slavery, colonialism, Jim Crow and apartheid, my people often see that the legal system is stacked against us, so we have come to rely on a higher form of law that is not man made, but God made. It is through the prism of this God made law or moral code that we view Mr. Sterling’s actions. Moreover, the audio did not only anger NBA player’s it also angered many white Americans; it angered the President of the USA who during a press briefing in Malaysia had to wash America's dirty linen in public by saying, “The United States continues to wrestle with the legacy of race and slavery and segregation, that's still there, the vestiges of discrimination,” it also angered not only African American’s but black people in Europe, Africa and all over the world.

Page 4: NBA Racism : We See Things Differently

Now back to the central thesis of your article that punishing Mr. Sterling could have ramification for other basketball personalities. You make reference to Tony Parker a French NBA player of African descent who made the quenelle salute and then you ask the question, “Is there a place for Parker in the NBA?” To answer your question, the answer is there should be no place for any racist in the NBA whether he is a black player or a white owner.

Mr. Caldwell, instead of exploring whether the motivation behind Donald Sterling’s punishment was money driven or whether his racial outburst was not illegal or whether Ms. Stiviano manipulated him to make those racially incendiary comments, we should rather commend the NBA for taking a stand. In recent days, we have heard about racist attacks melted on Dani Alves, the Barcelona player and read about Jeremy Clarkson using the “N” word in his Top Gear programme. Racism is a moral scar on humanity and drastic actions need to be taken if we are to stamp out racism in the 21st century.

Why do my people always see things differently? To understand, one has to go into the history books and read about the oppression of my people. Martin Luther King put it eloquently when he said, “I should have realized that few members of the oppressor race can understand the deep groans and passionate yearnings of the oppressed race, and still fewer have the vision to see that injustice must be rooted out by strong, persistent and determined action.” So when it comes to the issue of race, my people will continue to see things differently. While others may see throwing a banner skin at Dani Alves as no big deal, we see it as an insult to our race; while some people in government see no need for the BBC to terminate Jeremy Clarkson’s contract even though he used the “N” word, we see it as the government turning a blind eye towards racism taking place in the media; while some may see the recent NBA fallout as a drama more about money than morals, we see the recent NBA fallout as a tragedy more about morals than money.

Selah

Yours faithfully,

Ahmed Sule, CFA [email protected] May 2014

Cc: Editor of The Financial Times