4 ms·

Interesting interpretation of events. Most accounts of the NBA controversy that I've heard suggest the apology to China made by the Houston Rockets's James Har

by vnchr 7y ago

Interesting interpretation of events. Most accounts of the NBA controversy that I've heard suggest the apology to China made by the Houston Rockets's James Harden[1] in response is what has drawn criticism. And the GM has been pressured into making an apology [2]. That was after the Houston Rockets immediately distanced themselves from the statement [3]. The criticism I've heard has been of the subservient apologies, because freedom. Our National Basketball Association has demonstrated a split loyalty. Also, Kaepernick was not banned, although perhaps that's an interpretation of his not being rehired after his contract ended. Statistically, he was the worst or second worst QB in the NFL. Add to that the PR risk, and the return on investment is negative. In China, if I posted that same critical comment to social media, I'd fear for my life and the lives of my family as a direct action from the government. In the USA, Colin Kaepernick has a lucrative Nike endorsement and, while a controversial figure, lives freely and is often celebrated freely. I'll side with us Americans on this one. [1] https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/27787634/james-harden-apologizes-controversy-grows-love-china https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/27787634/james-harden-ap... [2] https://www.npr.org/2019/10/07/767805936/houston-rockets-gm-apologizes-for-tweet-supporting-hong-kong-protesters https://www.npr.org/2019/10/07/767805936/houston-rockets-gm-... [3] https://twitter.com/TilmanJFertitta/status/1180330287957495809 https://twitter.com/TilmanJFertitta/status/11803302879574958... [4] "Kaepernick had a defense-adjusted yards above replacement — Football Outsiders’ ultimate value quotient — of minus-182, 35th in the NFL. By all metrics, he was one of the worst quarterbacks in the league." https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/colin-kaepernick-49ers-start-chip-kelly-nfl-buffalo-stats-career-highlights-fantasy-101116 https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/colin-kaepernick-49ers-s...

par4crsei 7y ago
You’re talking about celebrities who are treated differently. How’s that population of effectively “disappeared” minorities into prison for pot possession and migrants in cages make it look relative to China and its behavior of kidnapping people. There are oodles of folks held in America without charges every year. Oh they got a trial here sure. One with a predetermined outcome codified into law years ago. America has had the advantage of being able to sell the pretense via warm and cuddly commercials to the public over the last few decades. The rhetoric in China and America is the same. And “proper Chinese” believe a lot of the same about China vs. US All countries fail the bottom 1/3rd. Some are just better at justifying it emotionally
- vnchr 7y ago
  Sure. But that's not because of freedom of speech. And I think this is a discussion related to freedom of speech rather than the more subjective and infinitely broad, "Which is better: China or America?" I can safely criticize my country and its officials because I am not a Chinese citizen.
  - par4crsei 7y ago
    Try protesting Trump in front of the White House. Odds are you won’t even risk seeing how free your speech is. That’s the difference in America: most wont bother cause for most it’s fine. A lot of Chinese as a percentage of the population can say the same. I think fewer Americans are inclined to try and test it, more so than it being true. Look at the pipeline situation, campus protests, etc of the last five years. Police beatings and pepper spray in the face. That’s what happens when people stand and sit around in protest. Put together a protest on the scale of Hong Kong’s in NYC or LA. See how it goes. TL;DR it’s more explicit in China because they actually stand up more frequently than Americans. And as a percentage of our population we have more people in jail for minor drug possession related offenses. That’s seen as a tacit protest of government law and you’re put in the clink. Predetermined outcomes written into law plainly, we’ve all just normalized to.
    - vnchr 7y ago
      Lots of people protest Trump at the White House. Like, a lot. It’s cool. People call him out on Twitter constantly. No repercussions. Lots of organized protests, most of them complaining about him. No consequences for the protesting. Seriously, I can mail a letter telling my President that I think he’s shit, and there are no consequences. Freedom. Now, if I say something even vaguely threatening in that letter, the Secret Service will pay me a visit. And I’d feel uncomfortable. But that’s appropriate threat assessment. We don’t arrest our people for criticizing leaders. That’s a protected right. I’ll make a bet: you and I will both send the same insulting, critical letters to our respective national leaders, and I bet that I will suffer no consequences provided that the content is of a non-threatening nature whereas you may not be so lucky. In that respect, I have the opportunity to contribute to the public discourse that is necessary for my nation to progress. I can openly disagree with my leaders, and that is the very means for change in both who will lead and where we will go.
taobility 7y ago
Kaepernick is safe because he is a celebrity, did you read the news about some other nobody Americans?
- vnchr 7y ago
  I’m a nobody American. I can demonstrate my freedom, if you’d like. I, being of sound mind, declare that my President is shit. And he’s wrong about things. And his hair is ridiculous. No consequences. That’s allowed. My real identity is adequately tied to this account, and I fear no repercussions for criticizing my government leaders.
  - taobility 7y ago
    In US, it's more scare to say you support Trump, and also it's declare to death that you say you don't like black people. And also, you are freely to say that in China, and you may get applause for that. Does that approve anything? Did you get my point?
    - vnchr 7y ago
      I do appreciate your point that there are social consequences for certain kinds of personal expression. If I publicly support an unpopular political or religious or social view, it could damage my professional reputation and limit my job prospects. But those aren’t government enforced laws. People can choose their own rules for speech. If I insult my employer, I may be fired. There are social consequences for taking controversial stances—that’s true of all societies. But those aren’t legal consequences in the USA. Our government can’t intervene except for specific cases where you are inciting violence or physical danger when it comes to personal expression. When it comes to speech, should the government have the power or should the people have the power? I don’t want my government to have that power over me, and I certainly don’t want China to have that power over citizens of the USA.
      - taobility 7y ago
        1. we are talking about freedom of speech. Whether the damage from the peers or from the administration, for the normal people, I don't think there is big difference. 2. I am not fully understand what's your meaning of China's power over USA citizens. I don't think Chinese government has enforced any US citizen do anything they don't want to do. 3. Boycotting is really normal in modern days, and it's a polite way to express your disagreement. NBA can stand with their point, but Chinese and Chinese government can boycott as well. Just like what Kaepernick did and NFL audience did.
clairity 7y ago
i'm not following it closely enough to pinpoint where most of the criticism is being directed, but quite a bit seems to be directed at the nba and the rockets. the nba and the rockets are clearly trying to walk a tightrope between mollifying the CCP without capitulating to it (by outright punishing daryl morey). kaepernick's ranking as a quarterback is debatable but a quorum of knowledgeable people (i.e., not me) seemed to view him as a somewhere in the middle of the pack of starting quarterbacks. in any case, another interesting element of the comparison is that nba players/employees have more collective power than their nfl counterparts. individual players, who feel loyalty to a range of interests other than profit, are willing to take stands that an unempathetic corporate entity just won't.

by vnchr 7y ago

par4crsei 7y ago

You’re talking about celebrities who are treated differently. How’s that population of effectively “disappeared” minorities into prison for pot possession and migrants in cages make it look relative to China and its behavior of kidnapping people. There are oodles of folks held in America without charges every year. Oh they got a trial here sure. One with a predetermined outcome codified into law years ago. America has had the advantage of being able to sell the pretense via warm and cuddly commercials to the public over the last few decades. The rhetoric in China and America is the same. And “proper Chinese” believe a lot of the same about China vs. US All countries fail the bottom 1/3rd. Some are just better at justifying it emotionally

vnchr 7y ago
Sure. But that's not because of freedom of speech. And I think this is a discussion related to freedom of speech rather than the more subjective and infinitely broad, "Which is better: China or America?" I can safely criticize my country and its officials because I am not a Chinese citizen.
- par4crsei 7y ago
  Try protesting Trump in front of the White House. Odds are you won’t even risk seeing how free your speech is. That’s the difference in America: most wont bother cause for most it’s fine. A lot of Chinese as a percentage of the population can say the same. I think fewer Americans are inclined to try and test it, more so than it being true. Look at the pipeline situation, campus protests, etc of the last five years. Police beatings and pepper spray in the face. That’s what happens when people stand and sit around in protest. Put together a protest on the scale of Hong Kong’s in NYC or LA. See how it goes. TL;DR it’s more explicit in China because they actually stand up more frequently than Americans. And as a percentage of our population we have more people in jail for minor drug possession related offenses. That’s seen as a tacit protest of government law and you’re put in the clink. Predetermined outcomes written into law plainly, we’ve all just normalized to.
  - vnchr 7y ago
    Lots of people protest Trump at the White House. Like, a lot. It’s cool. People call him out on Twitter constantly. No repercussions. Lots of organized protests, most of them complaining about him. No consequences for the protesting. Seriously, I can mail a letter telling my President that I think he’s shit, and there are no consequences. Freedom. Now, if I say something even vaguely threatening in that letter, the Secret Service will pay me a visit. And I’d feel uncomfortable. But that’s appropriate threat assessment. We don’t arrest our people for criticizing leaders. That’s a protected right. I’ll make a bet: you and I will both send the same insulting, critical letters to our respective national leaders, and I bet that I will suffer no consequences provided that the content is of a non-threatening nature whereas you may not be so lucky. In that respect, I have the opportunity to contribute to the public discourse that is necessary for my nation to progress. I can openly disagree with my leaders, and that is the very means for change in both who will lead and where we will go.

taobility 7y ago

Kaepernick is safe because he is a celebrity, did you read the news about some other nobody Americans?

vnchr 7y ago
I’m a nobody American. I can demonstrate my freedom, if you’d like. I, being of sound mind, declare that my President is shit. And he’s wrong about things. And his hair is ridiculous. No consequences. That’s allowed. My real identity is adequately tied to this account, and I fear no repercussions for criticizing my government leaders.
- taobility 7y ago
  In US, it's more scare to say you support Trump, and also it's declare to death that you say you don't like black people. And also, you are freely to say that in China, and you may get applause for that. Does that approve anything? Did you get my point?
  - vnchr 7y ago
    I do appreciate your point that there are social consequences for certain kinds of personal expression. If I publicly support an unpopular political or religious or social view, it could damage my professional reputation and limit my job prospects. But those aren’t government enforced laws. People can choose their own rules for speech. If I insult my employer, I may be fired. There are social consequences for taking controversial stances—that’s true of all societies. But those aren’t legal consequences in the USA. Our government can’t intervene except for specific cases where you are inciting violence or physical danger when it comes to personal expression. When it comes to speech, should the government have the power or should the people have the power? I don’t want my government to have that power over me, and I certainly don’t want China to have that power over citizens of the USA.
    - taobility 7y ago
      1. we are talking about freedom of speech. Whether the damage from the peers or from the administration, for the normal people, I don't think there is big difference. 2. I am not fully understand what's your meaning of China's power over USA citizens. I don't think Chinese government has enforced any US citizen do anything they don't want to do. 3. Boycotting is really normal in modern days, and it's a polite way to express your disagreement. NBA can stand with their point, but Chinese and Chinese government can boycott as well. Just like what Kaepernick did and NFL audience did.

clairity 7y ago

i'm not following it closely enough to pinpoint where most of the criticism is being directed, but quite a bit seems to be directed at the nba and the rockets. the nba and the rockets are clearly trying to walk a tightrope between mollifying the CCP without capitulating to it (by outright punishing daryl morey). kaepernick's ranking as a quarterback is debatable but a quorum of knowledgeable people (i.e., not me) seemed to view him as a somewhere in the middle of the pack of starting quarterbacks. in any case, another interesting element of the comparison is that nba players/employees have more collective power than their nfl counterparts. individual players, who feel loyalty to a range of interests other than profit, are willing to take stands that an unempathetic corporate entity just won't.