In this situation, I would agree it's juvenile, pretty much like calling someone a douchbag.
Reggie Miller Corrects Scottie Pippen
- Thread starter Chescat
- Start date
Calling someone a douchebag is an insult. Calling someone a racist is basically calling them evil.
Racism is the United States's Original Sin. The mistaken belief that black people were/are less than whites was/is used to justify inhuman treatment of our black American brothers and sisters. It was used to justify chattel slavery, efforts to disenfranchise freed slaves after the Civil War, Jim Crow, assassinations and terrorism, and current efforts to marginalize black Americans politically. Calling someone a racist is a shorthand of saying you support some or all of those horrors. Being an overt racist has actually become so toxic that white supremacists have had to totally pivot their language and behavior away from things like the N-word (to thug, All Lives Matter, etc.) and public demonstration (away from KKK marches and toward nearly completely online efforts).
Because deploying a charge of racism is almost a super-accusation, it needs to be used carefully. People won't take the charge seriously if it's used casually to describe anything negative that happens to a black person. I think that hurts others who would make the same claim except with much more evidence and in a more grounded and level-headed way. Because it lets people with an actual racist agenda say things like: "See? Racism doesn't exist!" or "Those cops who killed that unarmed person couldn't have been racist, racism isn't real." etc.
That's why, IMO, Pippen should have said something else about Jackson. Attacked his temperment or just called him a jerk. Because I agree with you, that's what Pippen was trying to do, and by calling Jackson a racist over a single incident that was on its face not at all racist, he made himself look like an ass and potentially hurt real and credible accusations of racism.
Last edited:
I think this thread should end, but I must respond to your comments.
Scottie calling Phil a racist is between both of them. Only one situation may have been discussed during the interview, but Scottie knows why he called him a racist. And that's between both men.
Also, I don't think Scottie needs to justify or get approval to call someone racist. If that's how he feels, then it's his opinion. I don't agree with folks being falsely accused, however one cannot tell Scottie how he should feel or be a "judge" on racism.
OFFS ...
Super accusation? Really?
Do you get the death sentence if you are a "racist?"
It's pretty simple, if you are a one, then you are one.
If you aren't one, then so tfw if someone calls you one, cause you aren't.
Again, yeah, Pippen is butt hurt about not getting the shot, but if you take away EITHER side of the hyperbole, he was throwing shade at a guy he knows a million times better than you do. There is something more personal about it between them.
This is one of those rare "both sides" are ridiculous things ...
It's not between both of them, though, because it's a public accusation. Scottie made it others' business by taking it public. Surely he knows how to get in touch with Phil. Neither Scottie nor anyone else gets to throw a bomb at someone like that and then avoid scrutiny by hiding behind the "this is between me and him." This was about damaging Phil publicly. It backfired, but that's what Pippen was trying to do.
And agreed, he doesn't need to get anyone's approval for his own feelings. But if you publicly attack the core of one's character with very weak evidence based on the disclosure of a single incident, you should be prepared to be ridiculed and questioned. People have every right to conclude that Pippen's accusation was either hyperbole or self-promotion.
Let's treat people like adults. If you're a 55 year old man, you should accept responsibility for yourself. And if you're calling a former boss a racist because you're in your feels about your divorce or trying to sell whiskey, you should be ashamed of yourself.
Do I really need to spell out the personal and professional ramifications of people thinking that you're a racist? Even if it's not true, it's not exactly something that can be disproven. There isn't a test that you can take to get your name cleared. Some people are going to think Jackson is a racist because of this. That's just a fact, and it's unfair to him that Scottie did this.
Again, you seem to think that this is a matter of opinion. It isn't. It makes no difference what else Scottie knows or has seen because he only shared one story. When people say "this person has quality X or Y" they cite the best example of evidence that they can find. You don't keep your powder dry under the theory that "well, there could be more so Pippen might be right!" If anything, it's the other way. This nothing story is all Pippen has, so Jackson is more or less cleared.
