Kyrie is an antisemite. And we have schadenfreude?

CoffeeNerdness

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2012
7,083
He's already done step 1. and step 2. (Just needs to re-cut the check). Steps 3-6 could be a joke. He's back.
 

NDame616

will bailey
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
1,977
Why do you think he won't complete them?1 and 2 are done. The Nets could make #3 and 4 reading a one paragraph essay "Jews are cool people. Leave them alone and STFU" reads that and he's done with those 2 steps. 5 could be a half hr meeting with some people. And 6 is a discussion with Tsai at a bar over a few bourbon.

And if any media member asks for details on the steps everyone says "we arent discussing personnel matters publicly "
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
21,941
Los Angeles, CA

sox311

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 30, 2004
1,747
That's what she said.
He will do them because his dad and step mom, his agent, got in his ear and said, "So, Ky.... You may not ever get another contract in the NBA or from a big time endorsement. So, you sort of need this 36 million dollars becasue it could very well be your last big pay day ever."

Let's say he never plays in the NBA again. He will have lost all his endorsements and if he wants to bring in money from things besides investments he'll have to look to fringe supporters like single issue politicians, fake canidates do. And they don't pay 36M.

If he does play in the NBA after this season it is likely that he will be on one year MLE deals or minimums to prove he isn't a sunk cost. The rest of this season is 99% likely to be his final large (large for him and other NBA stars, not for John Doe) earning potential year.

So, he'll do it all in the name of money, he may have realized that he shit the bed. If he has one ounce of intelligence left in him, he will do this. Even his pride/ego shouldn't stand in the way of this. Or, maybe he doesn't give a fuck and will just make do with what he already has.
 

ElUno20

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
5,246
He will do them because his dad and step mom, his agent, got in his ear and said, "So, Ky.... You may not ever get another contract in the NBA or from a big time endorsement. So, you sort of need this 36 million dollars becasue it could very well be your last big pay day ever."
Bingo. They slapped some sense into him, financially, and now he's trying to salvage his 30 mill.

Randomly, i was channel surfing and caught a bit of espn 30 for 30 on the And 1 mixtape guys. They come to a part where they start talking about the And 1 guys playing in the NBA and if they're good enough to hang, etc. So they cut to active players to essentially say "hell no! not a chance"....and one of the guys is Kyrie! It was so odd to hear him talk about how rare and hard it is to be in the nba given how little shit he's given about playing in the league the last 3 years. To hear him speak with respect and reverence for an NBA spot was such a contrast to today's blithering moron.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
He will do them because his dad and step mom, his agent, got in his ear and said, "So, Ky.... You may not ever get another contract in the NBA or from a big time endorsement. So, you sort of need this 36 million dollars becasue it could very well be your last big pay day ever."

Let's say he never plays in the NBA again. He will have lost all his endorsements and if he wants to bring in money from things besides investments he'll have to look to fringe supporters like single issue politicians, fake canidates do. And they don't pay 36M.

If he does play in the NBA after this season it is likely that he will be on one year MLE deals or minimums to prove he isn't a sunk cost. The rest of this season is 99% likely to be his final large (large for him and other NBA stars, not for John Doe) earning potential year.

So, he'll do it all in the name of money, he may have realized that he shit the bed. If he has one ounce of intelligence left in him, he will do this. Even his pride/ego shouldn't stand in the way of this. Or, maybe he doesn't give a fuck and will just make do with what he already has.
Or maybe he has $50 million in the bank and “knows better” and won’t do what Those People tell him to do as they try to control him.
 

greek_gawd_of_walks

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 14, 2009
8,426
Wiscansin, by way of Attleboro
As a Net, Kevin Durant is now 32-14 without Kyrie Irving, and 29-23 without him.
Going back to his time in Boston, the Celtics were an impressive number above .500 too plus a decent playoff run sans Irving

Edit: 26-11 between 2017-2018 and 2018-2019. A run to the conference finals with Irving sidelined in vs a gentleman's sweep in round two (one of the most embarrassing efforts I can ever recall vs Milwaukee) with Mr Chemistry.
 
Last edited:

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
15,639
I think there are ALOT of people that are going to either ignore or be disappointed with how much sway Kyrie has with his community.

Tribalism is real and not just with evil white people.
If Kyrie has sway, that’s unfortunate, but shouldn’t stop the Nets or the NBA from taking action if and when appropriate.

If anti-Semitism has sway, well, then we have a real problem across the board. Because scapegoating Jews is not going to work out well for the Black community at large, even if it did work for Kanye.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
53,021
Some of the new covenant was to get past so many lists of rules
Yeah, I think it goes deeper than that, although that may be what you are alluding to.

Some of those letters are about the established powers demanding that you deny what you believe in your heart to be the truth. I can at once believe that Kyrie believes things that are empirically incorrect, and also that he’s kinda a shithead, while also seeing the perils that demanding public profession of a belief might hold.

From some points of view, this is gonna look like a demand for brainwashing. Clockwork Orange shit, although that’s obviously an exaggerated account.

I tried to raise this before but I think it was perceived mostly in legal terms, but as much as I might agree with the content for any X, requirements of affirmative statements of belief for employment are fraught.

I’m not even saying it’s right or wrong. Just that we should recognize that this is a huge deal—much more so even than the “slippery slope” that was mentioned previously—and it behooves us not to miss that simply because many of us believe the factual truth of the matter to be a no brainer. There is a physic of things here. And with different facts, things are often seen differently; as per the post this hopped off from, stuff has been written about such situations in the past, yeah?
 

InstaFace

He's no Nathan Hale
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
16,520
Pittsburgh, PA
I tried to raise this before but I think it was perceived mostly in legal terms, but as much as I might agree with the content for any X, requirements of affirmative statements of belief for employment are fraught.

I’m not even saying it’s right or wrong. Just that we should recognize that this is a huge deal—much more so even than the “slippery slope” that was mentioned previously—and it behooves us not to miss that simply because many of us believe the factual truth of the matter to be a no brainer. There is a physic of things here. And with different facts, things are often seen differently; as per the post this hopped off from, stuff has been written about such situations in the past, yeah?
I, for one, am comfortable drawing a line between public figures and private figures, and between "don't say anything that will be a PR problem for us, because you are not just Employee #11, you are The Product", vs "you must affirmatively hold and profess these beliefs".

As long as private figures aren't forced to do some cult-like rituals they don't or can't understand, like, I dunno, saying the pledge of allegiance in schools, I think we should be on safe ground.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
53,021
I, for one, am comfortable drawing a line between public figures and private figures, and between "don't say anything that will be a PR problem for us, because you are not just Employee #11, you are The Product", vs "you must affirmatively hold and profess these beliefs".

As long as private figures aren't forced to do some cult-like rituals they don't or can't understand, like, I dunno, saying the pledge of allegiance in schools, I think we should be on safe ground.
Oh, sure. I agree with that general position. But I’m thinking in terms of distinguishing between separate moments in this.

That Kyrie is a public face of the broader organization and, as such, if he makes public statements that hurt the brand, he will be sanctioned? Sure. That stands to reason.

But, as a consequence, requiring him to make public statements that the organization determines that are right and proper, when they may pertain to matters of his personal belief? That’s waaaaaaay more complicated.

And they may have the legal ability to make such a requirement. What I’m trying to convey, though, is that demanding that someone say that they believe something that they do not is very different from saying that they should have kept quiet about it in the first place.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
13,219
Well, that’s constructive.
Wasn't trying to pull away from the conversation, but I think the emphasis is important.

That people are surprised or acting like you need to dig into nooks and crannies of African American communities to find subvert racism speaks volumes to the people holding the microphone.

Society had spent years trying to convince one race of people that another race has had their foot on their throat. And while there's some truth to it, there should be no question as to why a subset of people are really angry at everyone they can be angry at.

Lord knows I would be.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
13,219
If anti-Semitism has sway, well, then we have a real problem across the board. Because scapegoating Jews is not going to work out well for the Black community at large, even if it did work for Kanye.
If I was black, how do you think I should feel about your above statement?

Almost feels like a threat.

And this isn't to say your racist. Just highlighting the place we've all put ourselves in.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
15,639
If I was black, how do you think I should feel about your above statement?

Almost feels like a threat.

And this isn't to say your racist. Just highlighting the place we've all put ourselves in.
What I was trying to say is that scapegoating another group is not the way to prevent scapegoating of your own group. Not my problem if people don't read it that way or don't agree for some weird reason.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
53,021
Wasn't trying to pull away from the conversation, but I think the emphasis is important.

That people are surprised or acting like you need to dig into nooks and crannies of African American communities to find subvert racism speaks volumes to the people holding the microphone.

Society had spent years trying to convince one race of people that another race has had their foot on their throat. And while there's some truth to it, there should be no question as to why a subset of people are really angry at everyone they can be angry at.


I was thinking more in terms of the just evil
White people part… seemed like a strawman.

But as to the rest, it rather seems all over the place, to be honest. But with a lot of energy behind it.

Lord knows I would be.
Did you, per chance, read the short James Baldwin op-ed that @wade boggs chicken dinner linked to? I’m going to guess, “No,” but please forgive me I am mistaken. If not, I highly recommend it; the guy is smaht.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
13,219


I was thinking more in terms of the just evil
White people part… seemed like a strawman.

But as to the rest, it rather seems all over the place, to be honest.


Did you, per chance, read the short James Baldwin op-ed that @wade boggs chicken dinner linked to? I’m going to guess, “No,” but please forgive me I am mistaken. If not, I highly recommend it; the guy is smaht.
No to all of it. Bye.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
53,021
No to all of it. Bye.
I’m not sure I like this “I’ll fire a bold shot and then act aggrieved when I get the response that was precisely what I was looking for and loudly announce that I’m packing my things and going home because exactly what I planned to happen happened,” version of you. I rather prefer the version in BbtLs that steps up and says, “This is what I’ve learned over the years and I was once that guy but, now, here, I get this thing so hear me out.”

And fine, say no to all of it, I guess… but reading Baldwin is always worthwhile.

And if you’d read the fucking thing you’d see why I brought it up in response to your post. Jesus Christ… horses to water… and after all these years…
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
13,219
I’m not sure I like this “I’ll fire a bold shot and then act aggrieved when I get the response that was precisely what I was looking for and loudly announce that I’m packing my things and going home because exactly what I planned to happen happened,” version of you. I rather prefer the version in BbtLs that steps up and says, “This is what I’ve learned over the years and I was once that guy but, now, here, I get this thing so hear me out.”

And fine, say no to all of it, I guess… but reading Baldwin is always worthwhile.

And if you’d read the fucking thing you’d see why I brought it up in response to your post. Jesus Christ… horses to water… and after all these years…
57293
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
55,156
I'd prefer for you to acknowledge that making a passive aggresive meme about my intellect isn't very "constructive".

At least if we're trying to discuss the topic at hand.
All memes are passive aggressive. That’s what makes them funny. Don’t come for the memes man.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
53,021
I'd prefer for you to acknowledge that making a passive aggresive meme about my intellect isn't very "constructive".

At least if we're trying to discuss the topic at hand.
It wasn’t passive aggressive; there was nothing passive about it.

Not would I ever use it if I actually thought you were dumb. The reference from the movie itself is NOT an indication of a lack of cognitive ability and is misunderstood as such, so don’t you dare put that on me.

Why on this great flat earth do you want to make this into some kind of ego war? I meant, and still mean, that there was a lot of stuff spun up in that post and then it cane to a conclusion that didn’t really follow, and considering that it was a response to me already suggesting that you might not be being as clear about your ideas as you wanted to be…

Look, I’m not saying that you don’t have anything to say that it’s worth hearing. I’m saying: Why the fuck are you doing it the way you are doing it? Like, in ways to make it the least likely that you’ll get a fair hearing?

I’m not saying don’t speak. I’m suggesting it might be better to knock it off with the bs around it.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,232
Honolulu HI
Ed Reed, former football star, comes out of the closet on Twitter to reveal that he too is a blithering moron.
Here’s his tweet:
“These boys making business decisions, not worried about the people! I STAND WITH #KyrieIrving we are Harmed everyday! Stop acting as if BLACK folk are not treated worst than any. All the attn (apologies) PROVES it #CarryOn,”
He went on to post a series of Instagram posts with questionable content, including a video appearing to show a Jewish man striking and vomiting on a Black woman.
“What are we talking about? I love all but,” Reed wrote in a tweet about the video.
“This but a tweet make y’all mad,” he wrote linking the Instagram video again.
“I love all folk but this what we get! When we just be,” he wrote, quote tweeting one of his other tweets of the video.
 
Last edited:

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,758
Oh, sure. I agree with that general position. But I’m thinking in terms of distinguishing between separate moments in this.

That Kyrie is a public face of the broader organization and, as such, if he makes public statements that hurt the brand, he will be sanctioned? Sure. That stands to reason.

But, as a consequence, requiring him to make public statements that the organization determines that are right and proper, when they may pertain to matters of his personal belief? That’s waaaaaaay more complicated.

And they may have the legal ability to make such a requirement. What I’m trying to convey, though, is that demanding that someone say that they believe something that they do not is very different from saying that they should have kept quiet about it in the first place.
I agree with the bolded. I am uncomfortable with what amounts to policing people's thoughts. But: 1) he *is* the "face of the organization"; and 2) he can't unsay it. In a vacuum, I suppose there's a way to demonstrate to the player how fucked up what he's saying is, and then he expresses that. I don't think that works for Kyrie. He has left no doubt (in my mind) as to who he is. (Maybe I'm wrong.) So I am skeptical both of the demand and the efficacy have having someone renounce their beliefs a week after expressing them; a gesture that is likely to be obviously insincere. What's the answer? Ship him to a team that doesn't mind having vocal anti-semites among its ranks?
 

BostonFanInCanesLand

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 16, 2011
1,442
I agree with the bolded. I am uncomfortable with what amounts to policing people's thoughts. But: 1) he *is* the "face of the organization"; and 2) he can't unsay it. In a vacuum, I suppose there's a way to demonstrate to the player how fucked up what he's saying is, and then he expresses that. I don't think that works for Kyrie. He has left no doubt (in my mind) as to who he is. (Maybe I'm wrong.) So I am skeptical both of the demand and the efficacy have having someone renounce their beliefs a week after expressing them; a gesture that is likely to be obviously insincere. What's the answer? Ship him to a team that doesn't mind having vocal anti-semites among its ranks?
Putting aside (for a second anyway) what the Nets should do with their vocal anti-Semite, the tensions here are pretty fascinating.

The Nets‘ business interests involve wanting a winning team that puts rears in seats and merchandise on bodies. In addition their brand/value is impacted when members of the team (or the organization) promote bigoted crap to 4+ million followers and then the statements get amplified 10 fold by the fall out. Their ability to attract customers and their ability to attract free agents/re-sign players/coaches will be impacted by both the presence of a vocal bigot on their team and the actions that they take as information filters to the surface. And their current ability to compete for a playoff spot is volatile and uncertain. At what point will the Nets decide that the impact on this year’s W/L, draft position (further compromised by their bloodletting of draft picks), brand/marketability is too great and they are forced to jettison Kyrie? (Perhaps never. This is the last year of his contract).

How they place values on these trade offs (and if we ever learn anything about that valuation) is pretty fascinating.

The Boston Bruins management team just learned a costly lesson regarding what happens when you think adding a person known to have committed atrocities (and not known for showing much remorse/change other than court-mandated community service) is worth the risk. The players on the NHL team, the fans and members of the media took them to task. The management team will have to rebuild trust.

But we see these types of talent acquisition and retention far too often. Some are more cut and dry (acts of domestic violence, murder) but there is a continuum of morally repugnant to unsavory. And as long as teams value talent and marketability and don’t miss on their probability/magnitude of risk calculations then we will continue to see teams employ people who say and do destructive things.

Kyrie has repeatedly told us who he is. We should believe him. I know what I’d like the team, the fans, the players and society to do about it. Now we wait to see which way the wind blows between commerce, law, and morality.

(@joe dokes, @Reverend - I quoted the above post because I think the discussion around forcing an insincere public apology/policing an individual’s thoughts and the practical ramifications is riveting and a good foil to the short/mid/long term economic/legal structures and strategies, as well as the societal and moral underpinnings).
 

ragnarok725

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2003
6,046
Somerville MA
I agree with the bolded. I am uncomfortable with what amounts to policing people's thoughts. But: 1) he *is* the "face of the organization"; and 2) he can't unsay it. In a vacuum, I suppose there's a way to demonstrate to the player how fucked up what he's saying is, and then he expresses that. I don't think that works for Kyrie. He has left no doubt (in my mind) as to who he is. (Maybe I'm wrong.) So I am skeptical both of the demand and the efficacy have having someone renounce their beliefs a week after expressing them; a gesture that is likely to be obviously insincere. What's the answer? Ship him to a team that doesn't mind having vocal anti-semites among its ranks?
The answer is to cut him. They should cut him. This weird 6-step atonement plan is a shitty, logically inconsistent half measure.

Players should be cut more often. Fans should demand more. I don't want to root for a team that wins with an anti-semite any more than I want to root for a team with Deshaun Watson as the QB. If Kyrie was still on the Celtics I wouldn't be watching until he was gone.

These guys shouldn't have jobs. If they cut him, he takes time, he repents in a believable way, maybe another team can defend signing him.

But the idea that the team's success is paramount needs to die. Winning is just not that important.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
22,688
where I was last at
I think as a 7th task, I would like to hear in KI's own voice why he posted the link to the offending film and what specifically in the film he believes is true or not and why. And then discuss and debate his beliefs with a panel of professors learned in religion, history, psychology, sociology or other fields of thought that lend clarity and explanations to why predjudice is a strong force in humans. A field trip to the Museum of Jewish Heritage in NYC (Holocaust Museum) might be an 8th task that could be helpful as well.
 

Bernard Gilkey baby

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2002
547
I’m a non practicing Jewish man who grew up in Boston suburbs. And if i understand the demographic of this board correctly, this means that I’m either you, someone you are married to, or someone you are close friends with…

i was thinking about how the phrase “But some of my best friends are Black” is an inappropriate defensive response…. But here I am, DYING for one of these athletes to say something like “I have Jewish friends! And I have Jewish fans!This is making their lives harder! They are people just like everyone else. They aren’t trying to control anything…”

Over the weekend, John Mellencamp said it in really personal terms at the rock n roll hall of fame, talking about a friend who was Jewish and “f-ck ant-semitism.” It was impassioned plea and I wish we could get get that same level of enthusiasm from these athletes. Do they not know anyone Jewish? Can they state their objections to anti-semitism a little less like a hostage video. Even Lebron James spoke too generally. The guy has a production company in Hollywood. He knows Jewish people. I personally wrote some of his dialogue in the upcoming House Party movie. (He doesn’t know that). Come on, man. Where’s the passion? I say because I know most Jewish people have passion and interest for Black people’s civil rights and dignity. I just want to see it go both ways. And it’s just disappointing.

It signals to me that theres a real anti-semitism problem in the NBA. It needs to be addressed. My dad didn’t take me to the Boston garden as a kid thinking the NBA would become this.That doesn’t mean I will no longer care about Black rights, it just kinda hurts the soul.).
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
22,688
where I was last at
That's the thing about anti-semitism it appeals to a wide spectrum of political, religious and philosophical thought and has for thousands of years. It brings bigots and haters of different stripes together.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
17,005
Somewhere
Wrong side of the spectrum, man. It's making its way around black twitter/social media.
It basically uses the same style and substance as every other right wing meme, it’s right wing. It’s basically that misattributed Strom quote in different clothing. Black does not equal left-wing, either.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
13,219
It basically uses the same style and substance as every other right wing meme, it’s right wing. It’s basically that misattributed Strom quote in different clothing. Black does not equal left-wing, either.
It can be whatever political view you want. It doesn't matter, really. The point is that Kyrie continues to get support from parts of his community. Whatever side of the aisle is irrelevant.