Mark Cuban's Airball on Freedom

[Sybil Ludington]

Playing/singing the national anthem before all events is one of the ways to UNIFY a country. To bring people together, if for no other reason, than pride in their country. If they don't feel that, then why do they stay? There is nothing stopping them from emigrating to the country of their choice.

[Standing Wolf]

I worded my comment to you poorly and in the wrong way.

The US flag and national anthem stand for freedom and just treatment for all period. If people believe that as a country, we aren't living up to that, they should be celebrating the flag and anthem then demand that we live up to those principles. They should be focusing their protests rationally at the specific elements which they believe are not living up to those ideals. Not at the founding principles of the country.


Instead they are just angering the people who's support they should be trying to attract.

I can't find anything in that post to disagree with. It's a complex situation, and while it's a risky and presumptuous business to assign motives to an entire group of people, I think that a lot of the backlash against the Anthem and displays of the flag arises from their identification - in everything from political campaigns to popular culture - with expressions of jingoistic militarism and an uncritical acceptance of the status quo. White Supremacist groups and even neo-Nazis routinely display the Stars and Stripes at their rallies.



I agree completely that the flag, at the very least, ought to be cherished as a symbol by every American. I remember a performance by actor Harvey Fierstein years ago where he passed out American flags to the audience members and announced that it was "time to take back the American flag from the assh*les".

I think a lot of people see the singing of the Anthem - as well as the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance - as signs of subservience and conformity, rather than of celebration and unity. It is certainly not a case of any but a tiny, radical minority wanting to "destroy" the country; that Rightist straw man is thrown around far too frequently these days. More often than not it's simply a reflection of good old American contrarianism. "You want and expect me to do this thing...well FU!" Yes, it's childish...but it's a mistake to ascribe to those who do it a more sinister motive than that they are acting out their frustration and anger.

[Standing Wolf]

... Did he not take away their Right to stand up before this major sporting event and show their pride, take away that moment the camera focuses on all paying homage to the country.

After all this, is that really the best answer you can fabricate?

[Tahuyaman]

I can't find anything in that post to disagree with. It's a complex situation, and while it's a risky and presumptuous business to assign motives to an entire group of people, I think that a lot of the backlash against the Anthem and displays of the flag arises from their identification - in everything from political campaigns to popular culture - with expressions of jingoistic militarism and an uncritical acceptance of the status quo. White Supremacist groups and even neo-Nazis routinely display the Stars and Stripes at their rallies.



I agree completely that the flag, at the very least, ought to be cherished as a symbol by every American. I remember a performance by actor Harvey Fierstein years ago where he passed out American flags to the audience members and announced that it was "time to take back the American flag from the assh*les".

I think a lot of people see the singing of the Anthem - as well as the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance - as signs of subservience and conformity, rather than of celebration and unity. It is certainly not a case of any but a tiny, radical minority wanting to "destroy" the country; that Rightist straw man is thrown around far too frequently these days. More often than not it's simply a reflection of good old American contrarianism. "You want and expect me to do this thing...well FU!" Yes, it's childish...but it's a mistake to ascribe to those who do it a more sinister motive than that they are acting out their frustration and anger.

I think most of the opposition to the flag/anthem protests are from working class people, many of whom are vets, who don't take kindly to pampered millionaires complaining and preaching to us. Especially when most people believe they have not sacrificed anything other than periodic physical effort to achieve their position in life. It has nothing to do with their "identification" whatever that means.



Being patriotic and showing support for our founding principles and our military members isn't necessarily jingoistic. It's also not a sign of subservience and conformity.

[Standing Wolf]

I think most of the opposition to the flag/anthem protests are from working class people, many of whom are vets, who don't take kindly to pampered millionaires complaining and preaching to us. Especially when most people believe they have not sacrificed anything other than periodic physical effort to achieve their position in life. It has nothing to do with their "identification" whatever that means.

Being patriotic and showing support for our founding principles and our military members isn't necessarily jingoistic.

Of course it isn't - necessarily. Those who believe it is, however, are given support and ammunition for their view when they're constantly being screamed at that they're being unpatriotic by not supporting a single individual political office holder, for advocating for reasonable social causes that skew liberal, or for taking a side in international affairs that the U.S. government doesn't favor. When the people doing the screaming (and the condemning and the accusing) are holding an American flag and refusing to acknowledge that a patriotic American might disagree with them on some things, it tends to reflect negatively (in the minds of those being screamed at) on the flag itself - as truly unfortunate as that is.

It's also not a sign of subservience and conformity.

It shouldn't be. It doesn't have to be. But it's really difficult to argue that it's not a sign of conformity when someone - Mark Cuban, in this case - is given a tremendous amount of grief for not playing it. You may say that it's not a sign of conformity, but the real world fallout from not going along with it says otherwise.

[Tahuyaman]

...You may say that it's not a sign of conformity, but the real world fallout from not going along with it says otherwise.

A lot of people don't understand those who disagree with that.

[The Booman]

Cuban tried to get woke and got kicked in his basketballs.

[MMC]

After all this, is that really the best answer you can fabricate?

Uhm that is you playing on the Word Freedom, isnt it? But thanks for validating you couldnt figure that much out.

[Standing Wolf]

A lot of people don't understand those who disagree with that.

Think of it this way - if somebody is getting a lot of crap for not going along with what people want them to do, that's the very definition of nonconformity. If it were not for the fact that the NBA has the final say and that he's required to follow their directives, he'd be perfectly within his legal rights as the team's owner to stop playing the Anthem. If people associated with the team - whether as players, employees or fans - feel strongly enough about it, they're free to play, work or watch their basketball someplace else. I've objected to what I feel is the use of the term "taking an airball on freedom" in describing what Cuban attempted to do because it implies that he's withholding or violating someone's freedom in some way - whereas the only freedom really involved in this situation is the freedom of the owner of an entertainment venue to change up the program.

Anyway, Tahu, I appreciate your willingness to listen to my view of this thing without getting nasty in response. Not every member is capable of doing that, apparently.