Andrew Schulz's Flagrant with Akaash Singh
Andrew Schulz's Flagrant with Akaash Singh
"Maybe he feels that like, I gotta go beast mode for us to beat the fucking blazers. And they're smoking them now. But like, I got to do this. I got to go back to 28 year old LeBron with 36 year old LeBron confidence and fucking drive and abuse my body. And then all I got is AD." — Shelty
"The functional way you make change in this country. Effective bottom line. But, and how do you do it? How do you, okay, you can affect the bottom line, but how do you structurally make change? Like, what are some things you could actually do? Organized boycott. Lobby. Lobby." — Shelty
"You got these billionaires by their balls. You got to use it. How does change happen in this country? What is the actual functional way you make change in this country?" — Shelty
The discussion centers on the Milwaukee Bucks' decision to not play their NBA playoff game, sparking a league-wide players-only meeting. The initial catalyst appears to be the impact of racial injustice incidents on specific players, leading to a team-wide decision to protest. This action, however, created a ripple effect, forcing other teams and star players like LeBron James and Kawhi Leonard to confront the implications of continuing or boycotting the season, revealing differing priorities and potentially ego-driven decisions among top athletes.
The conversation delves into the complexities of enacting meaningful social change, questioning whether emotional, immediate actions like boycotts are the most effective. Speakers highlight the significant financial stakes involved, including the potential impact on future collective bargaining agreements and the threat of a lockout if the season is prematurely ended. The economic structure of the NBA playoffs, with billions in revenue shared among players, owners, and broadcasters, is presented as a critical factor in these decisions.
Ultimately, the dialogue shifts towards strategic approaches for long-term change. The concept of players creating their own wealth-driven lobby, similar to established interest groups, is proposed as a more sustainable method for influencing policy and systemic issues. This involves leveraging their financial power and collective influence to directly engage with the political and economic systems, rather than relying solely on protests or public statements.