a legitimacy of play?

There is a fair bit data recently about stuff to do with a basket case basketball team by the name of LA Clippers, and the owners who seem to be fairly racist indeed. Not just that, he is Open about being racist..

As far as it seems, people linked to players, coaches and other LA Clippers stuff, suggested that maybe they should not be working for owners who have racist leanings. The rationale being that its not illegal to work for such people, but it isn’t very legitimate..

That very legitimacy question seems to have spurred the NBA over lords to seek sanctions against the Openly racist owners.

What I do not really understand is how come, while being utterly apt in my view and calling the work for racist owners as questionably legit, there are no such legitimatacy concerns regarding banks, macdonalds, supermarkets, etc..? Why and how come deadend jobs for people who destroy societies as well as physical environments, or jobs for organisations that actively seek to exploit any perceived weakness for their own gain, and operations which actively contribute for taking resources out of people by any means necessary – eg political lobbying, etc. – are legit to work for? While at the same time, a play, a game, a spectacle of the senses, by one group/team gets to be illegit?

One does not negate the other, however, surely, if people can contemplate legitimacy of work, which am happy to see people can, then there are more jobs out there to make illegitimate..?

2 thoughts on “a legitimacy of play?

Leave a Reply