Kinja reply list

Read More
You might be wrong.Hamilton Nolan
4/30/14 6:23pm
Is this a good place to complain about how Jezebel posted an article today saying that Asian men are, as a class, rapists, and that even this was the fault of white men and about how most of the comments were white women saying either that they'd never date Asian men or posting pictures of Asian men they want to fuck?
Reply
- Read More
  MizJenkinsYou might be wrong.
  4/30/14 6:35pm
  No.
  Reply
- Read More
  You might be wrong.MizJenkins
  4/30/14 6:43pm
  Oh. Too bad, because I got banned from commenting there, so I can't do it myself and not enough people are doing it.
  Reply
Read More
ClioHamilton Nolan
4/30/14 6:00pm
That was beautiful. I couldn't agree more with his active protest philosophy. And for anyone completely flummoxed how a culture could ever survive with that kind of "disruption," just spend a week or two in Paris. They seem to be doing fine with people who stand up for the change they're looking for.
Reply
- Read More
  coupdepoignardClio
  4/30/14 6:15pm
  I wouln't say "fine"....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Fren…
  
  I get that that was nearly a decade ago but race relations in Paris haven't evolved much past that point...
  Reply
- Read More
  Cliocoupdepoignard
  4/30/14 6:30pm
  I wasn't making a direct connection to Paris's race relations; that would be a fool's errand. Each country's racial discrimination is a result of its unique history.
  
  What I was referencing was the Parisians' ability to leave work, school, and responsibilities in general to protest—non-violently for the most part—without having the entire society collapse. A criticism that was being fired at Homeboy Sandman was that people will disrespect African-Americans who renege on their responsibilities to engage in protest, and that, rather, continuing par for the course would be a greater statement of strength. I just don't think that's true. Protests and boycotts Sandman is describing would essentially be a strike on society, removing a very large portion of this country's foundation until change is made. I think it has the potential to work.
  Reply
Read More
s3rp3ntsHamilton Nolan
4/30/14 5:53pm
Risk is inherently personal. You can't adequately assess someone else's.
Reply
- Read More
  AnarchyOfTastes3rp3nts
  4/30/14 5:59pm
  
  Reply
- Read More
  s3rp3ntss3rp3nts
  4/30/14 6:28pm
  Also, not to be mean to this would-be rap star, but how many people are trying to "make it" right now and, given our experience with the numbers who reach commercial success, what are his realistic chances? So when he talks about risk... Keep it really real. After all, "there's no such thing as bad publicity."
  
  EDIT: Sorry - still thinking. What does the rest of his activist resume look like? Because if this bamma is sitting up here lecturing people, talking about he's "risking his hip hop career," and this is the extent of his action on the issue, we need to exchange serious words. Please do not tell me men like my grandfather were cowards, and the only thing you've done to date is be black, pay taxes and write one muhfuckin' essay for Gawker. Because if that is the case, I need to find him and slap the taste out his mouth. Register a voter. Tutor an illiterate adult. Dig a community garden. Risk your shit in true revolutionary fashion before you walk around telling other folk what they need to be doing with their time, money and lives.
  
  Please pick a stadium and have all the seats.
  Reply
Read More
dancemonkeyHamilton Nolan
4/30/14 7:41pm
What would have happened if the Clippers refused to play? Would racism has been solved? The problem with Homeboy's rhetoric is that its a protest without an answer. The Clippers don't need to take a stance against racism - the entire nation took a stance against racism. There really isn't any risk involved here. Not to Homeboy Sandman and not to the Clippers. Chris Paul would have been invited back to the NBA if he refused to play.

The truth is the Clippers players have played their entire careers for this chance to win the NBA championship. Chris Paul didn't re-sign with the Clippers b/c he wanted to work for Donald Sterling, he signed b/c he wanted to play for Doc Rivers and with Blake Griffin.

How many of us, minorities, go to work everyday in a place we feel is racist? I bet, a great deal of us. How many women go to work for a boss they feel is sexist? How many people go work for a boss who they feel doesn't respect them? Are they all cowards for quitting? Do you that for the boss - or are you doing that for yourself? Newsflash - not everyone gets to live their life as an artist or a radio personality (hell Tavis Smiley). Not every one's opinion is respected. The Clippers players are playing for themselves. They always have been. The owner is just figurehead, someone most players would be happy to avoid.

I don't believe for a second, Homeboy, if faced with the same dilenma would have walked away. He can pat himself on the back all he wants, but he is no more righteous than Chris Paul, Doc Rivers, Blake Griffin or JJ Reddick. The Clippers walking off the court wouldn't have ended racism, started a new social movement or did anything else. It would have just cost them a game.

You know the difference between the civil rights movement Homeboy references and today? During the CRM, people led and the athletes followed. Now, we expect the athletes to lead, and the people to follow. I mean he published his piece under the name - Homeboy Sandman? Celebrity has got us all fucked in the head.
Reply
- Read More
  BabyPowderSlapdancemonkey
  4/30/14 8:32pm
  I don't think he understands that making enough money to say fuck you to the man is overcoming some of this bullshit. Now these guys have enough money to give their kids generational success. It is how white people stay on top. It might be good to take a book out of the people on top's play book.
  Reply
- Read More
  Ardendancemonkey
  4/30/14 11:20pm
  And minorities and women will continue to work in sexist/racist environments because they (and those who also don't stand up) refuse to organize and, en masse, reject the culture until it changes to meet their demands.
  
  Hypotheticalscenario, but imagine if you will some kind of massive, nationwide coordinated movement by a minority (say, Hispanics) to just stop going to work in order to demand the social change and respect that they deserve as well as fair employment treatment. Imagine what would happen across the country, or hell JUST California alone, if all the undocumented workers were united in a single, unified goal and didn't pick another piece of produce until their demands were met. Would they suffer consequences? Yes, but the results on everyone else would be catastrophic. They would HAVE to be appeased
  
  Now imagine that they are all unified in their resolve and one day to show their anger...they all go to work in the fields with their shirts on backwards. Wow. Bold statement. And no one cared because those that were oppressing and mistreating and taking advantage of them were still getting exactly what they wanted out of them.
  Reply
Read More
ArdenHamilton Nolan
4/30/14 8:01pm
I think the idea of fighting for something has lost all meaning when the criticism against fighting is that "it might make us uncomfortable for a while" or "we might suffer if we fight."

Well....yeah? That's kind of the point.

Who here honestly thinks that standing up against people who are actively abusing you isn't going to receive some kind of blowback. I see people all the time saying things like "well the worker can't afford to strike or walk out, he has a family to feed." "The NBA players can't walk off the court because they might be punished for it." "The oppressed can't march because they may be attacked." As if those observations somehow justify the weak kneed acceptance of abuse.

Yeah, you're GOING to be retaliated for fighting back against oppression. That's kind of what happens when someone squeezing you is told no: they squeeze harder. It's your responsiblity to squeeze back. Will you lose your job? Will you get fined? Will you get assaulted on the street? Probably. But those are the prices you have to pay for standing up to something. No one is ever going to give you what you want if you ASK for it. You have to take it. You have to show that your resolve will outlast theirs. That you ARE willing to be fired/starve/get killed over what you think is right because I guarantee you your opposition will break first: When you're all the way up top, you have far more to lose.

The Founding Fathers fought for the idea of independence at the risk of their lives. They did it anyways. Civil Rights protesters marched and sat in at the risk of their lives. They did it anyways. Iraq held election today, and threats of violence and actual acts of violence, they voted anyways.

What did the Clippers players do when their boss views them as something below actual cattle to be herded about for amusement and profit? They turned their shirts inside out. Bravo, boys. Bravo.

So yes, everyone who has ever had a chance to stand up for a cause, and refused to do so because it might make them suffer, or make them somewhat uncomfortable for a slight period of time, has given the people doing the oppressing a free pass to continue unmolested. That DOES make you a coward.
Reply
Read More
Freddie DeBoerHamilton Nolan
4/30/14 6:02pm
I can't wait for white people on twitter to tell me how I should feel about this racial controversy
Reply
Read More
Bitch PuddingHamilton Nolan
4/30/14 6:13pm

"I'm also not sure why she keeps insinuating that I have nothing at stake. I'm an independent artist who's livelihood is predicated entirely on the hip hop community supporting me, who just released an article titled 'Black People Are Cowards.' Is that not risky enough for you?"

No. It's really, really not. That's a very low stake of bravery. Especially when you're finger-wagging an entire ethnic group for not acting how you see fit.

If anything else, trending on Gawker for a week is blatant free promotion; political relevancy and media-cred all wrapped up in one click-baiting, shockingly titled article. Which, fine, I get it, I sincerely do, but don't count the twitter followers in one tab of your browser while calling it civil bravery in another. C'mon now.
Reply
Read More
HumboldtGenesisHamilton Nolan
4/30/14 6:04pm
"I'm also not sure why she keeps insinuating that I have nothing at stake."

It's simple really. You came crawling out of obscurity to make a "bold", anti-intellectual, half-baked argument about the lack of courage shown by people you don't know, and now you'll go crawling back without incident (save for a few internet rebuttals). Yeah, you risked nothing.
Reply
- Read More
  foolyooHumboldtGenesis
  4/30/14 8:01pm
  Not to mention that boycotts and walk-outs are one method of making a statement. Commentators at the literal table too over all NBA Playoff dialogue to articulate at length how wrong this situation is and demanded Sterling be forced out of the NBA is another way to make a statement.
  
  Magic Johnson showed up to work and in fact did some overtime. He had a job to do and something to say.
  Reply
Read More
blackintrovertHamilton Nolan
4/30/14 7:23pm
Well, I hope you'll be making sacrifices soon, Homeboy. Otherwise you're a hypocrite.
Reply
- Read More
  Miki Said Soblackintrovert
  4/30/14 7:57pm
  But don't you see? He DID sacrifice. He dared to posted his shitty opinions for the whole world to see! And he's a struggling rap artist! Revolution! No one's EVER wrote a blog post about shit they don't like. EVER!
  
  *mic drop*
  Reply
Read More
JWAdvocate83Hamilton Nolan
4/30/14 6:45pm
He still doesn't address the argument that maybe it shouldn't be the players and the coaches and the staff who actually made this team work after a decade, who should have to take off their shirts and walk away.

Donald Sterling is a part of the team by virtue of having enough money to buy the team from someone else. That's about as much as he had to do to be a part of the franchise. Have money.

The players are part of the team by virtue of real physical and mental effort, honing enough talent over the course of their lives to play for a team in the NBA —- and after about a decade of real work, gain enough ground to be considered a respectable, lucrative franchise.

What Homeboy suggests is a player's only options are to stay (like a coward) or leave, and abandoning the team is the only honorable course of action . . .

. . . But how could he be so "concerned with the risk of being oppressed on this planet forever" —- but not instead consider, I dunno, staying and fighting to rid their franchise of that cancerous tumor that endangers everything they worked hard for? Why would immediate abandonment be the first, best option?

Why should one closeted bigot who put little personal, actual effort into making the franchise work force an entire team (not just players, but coaches, staff, presumably everyone who isn't Donald Sterling) to abandon an enterprise they worked their asses off to make a success.

How is that not cowardice? How is that not allowing yourself to be oppressed? Why the f*ck should they be the ones to walk away?

And what part of that is so goddamn noble?
Reply
- Read More
  BabyPowderSlapJWAdvocate83
  4/30/14 8:29pm
  There is no oppression in being some of the top earners in the country (top ten percent).
  Reply
- Read More
  JWAdvocate83BabyPowderSlap
  5/01/14 1:49am
  Not at all the point, and it was in reference to Homeboy's quote from the interview.
  
  ("I appreciate her passion and her taking the time to voice her opinion. It appears that her and I look at risk differently. I'm concerned with the risk of being oppressed on this planet forever. She appears more concerned with financial security. A difference in priorities.")
  Reply