My point is that the few examples you probably have seen, those same dudes have probably criticized him at some other point. I'm sure they are dude blanketly riding for LaVar but most people that have support him in this thread have called him out when he crossed the line. The race aspect has mostly been about how he is portrayed in the media.
And I agree with how America capitalism and let down the black community, but LaVar Ball is really not an example of that. Yes he is a capitalist and yes he hustling, yes he is only out for himself but famb is harmless in the grander scale of things. He is slanging sneakers, the most damage he can do is become a competitive fringe to Nike, or Adidas.
The issue isn't what LaVar is doing. The issue is in seeing what he's doing as some type of revolutionary, pro-black stand and in seeing supporting BBB as some meaningful act of racial solidarity and support for the "little guy." These types of responses are abundant in this thread. Increased success by the black wealthy, who in this case are framed as the "little guys," will not translate into meaningful change for poor, working-class, or even middle-class black folks. But that is the narrative that LaVar is implicitly pushing and that I see many people implicitly (or explicitly) buying into. LaVar is appealing to these sentiments in marketing his brand in order to enrich himself and his family, which is fine, but let's call it what it is.
And too often a version of this logic is touted as the solution to issues plaguing black communities--that what is promoted by and benefits black elites is somehow good for all black people in some indirect or even tangible way.
The way things like education, infrastructure, healthcare, and financial services have been turn into commodities that are hand out in unequal amounts and unequal quality, instead of being viewed as public goods is the real danger. I am pretty lefty that believe America and the black community needs to warm up to socialist solutions but I don't vilify capitalism that much. Because that is that same type of thinking as the person that vilifies socialism because of a few scumbag dictators.
The main problem is not capitalism itself, it is how we practice capitalism. American love to preach about the effeminacy of markets and the beauty of perfect competition but we practice crony capitalism, hand firms monopolistic power, and indulge them in all their rent seeking behaviro. Black people are the lower classes (poor whites too) are told to the most basic of services have to be excludable and rivialous so we better prepared to practice some rugged individualism. At the same time a more robust welfare state is built for the white and rich.
No reasonable socialist imo should be running around demonizing capitalism, it should be pointing out how toxic the America verity is, why it should not be used in some instances, and why well regulated markets would be the better option in other times.
I largely agree with this. I was speaking within the context of American, neoliberal capitalism here, a system in which the top 0.1% of households own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.
The Umar Johnson example was because Johnson wanted black people to give him money to fund a school and pitched it as it was the black community responsibility to help him get the school because "look at how the education system treats black kids". The problem is systemic, and needs a policy solution to address the multiple system issues. Giving a person like Umar Johnson a school would have done little to nothing to solve the issue. Just give most black folk something to route for, while it would be helping a select few. I have a very low opinion of Johnson anyway, but bringing him up was not meant to be an indictment of him personally.
This was basically my response to the Obama's plan to donate $2 million for jobs in Chicago in lieu of a systemic policy solution, a response which you derided
I mean, if BBB is successful--and that is a
BIG if--what is the "best-case scenario" over the next 20 years? That two dozens wildly wealthy families of NBA pottery picks enrich themselves even further and put a small dent in the athletic corporate establishment? OK, that's fine, but we should understand that's where the potential benefits of this would end.
Even if I could wish a ton more public services into America’s economy. And free the black community from the economic barriers it faces, a dude like LaVar would still be allowed to exist.
As he should be. But dudes still shouldn't be bamboozled by self-interest being promoted as collective empowerment.
Just that if dem shoes ain’t ship by December. The Federal Finesser Enforcement Bureau might be on his ***
