“Until very recently expressing an unpopular opinion like Sterling did WAS considered to fall under free speech. “
Please cite an example.
I can cite a relevant example that demonstrates the exact opposite of your assertion that happened in my business: the entertainment industry.
Communist party members were banned from working in motion pictures. And, contrary to popular opinion, the “government” or “Senator McCarthy” had nothing to do with this ban. Nobody lost their job at the behest of the US government.
The studio owners were the authors and enforcers of the blacklist. No first amendment issues, because private employers decided whom to hire or not hire. The free market in action. Would you suggest that studio bosses who fled the anti-semitism, hunger, and terror of turn-of-the-century Europe be forced to subsidize the advocacy of politics they despised with a paycheck?
NBA team owners are behaving exactly like those mid-20th century studio heads. People who promulgate the views this guy holds are bad for business. He’s a black eye on their industry. They don’t want to work with him. And no government strong-arm tactics should force them to.
The free market of ideas impacting the free market of the economy is what’s happening here. And it’s the way America is supposed to work.
““Until very recently expressing an unpopular opinion like Sterling did WAS considered to fall under free speech.” “
“Please cite an example.”
Throughout the last 60 years people with unpopular opinions like the Klan or the Nazis were allowed to march even though most people found their views reprehensible. No one tried to destroy the lives of clerks or judges who approved the permits or even the marchers themselves. The predominant attitude was that they had freedom of speech and had the right to use public facilities to express their opinions. The same is true of the antiwar hippie scum or black panthers, etc. No one sought to deny them their free speech or the right to speak on campuses. Contrast that with the current environment where people with majority opinions are banned from campus, threatened with violence or simply ostracized and ridiculed.
“Would you suggest that studio bosses who fled the anti-semitism, hunger, and terror of turn-of-the-century Europe be forced to subsidize the advocacy of politics they despised with a paycheck?”
Just like people are not able to discriminate hiring or renting apts on the basis of race, I would suggest not being able to discriminate hiring on the basis of political opinion. That means if a person does their job and does not publically express views counter to their job position, then it is no one’s business but their own. For example if I work for a fracking company I cant publically advocate banning fracking. However, if I want to send money to an anti-fracking group or march in a rally that would be protected (unless it can be shown that by that action the business was harmed).
“NBA team owners are behaving exactly like those mid-20th century studio heads. People who promulgate the views this guy holds are bad for business. He’s a black eye on their industry. They don’t want to work with him. And no government strong-arm tactics should force them to.”
IMO a person should not have their property or livelihood taken away based on an illegally recorded and released private conversation. I also think the “outrage” of the other owners is solely based on fear of the race hustler mob. In the case of the NBA the mob will impact business and profits so they may be justified in getting rid of Sterling, however I would like to see the leaker sued for any losses or fines he must pay and prosecution for an illegal wiretap, privacy invasion and malicious intent.
“The free market of ideas impacting the free market of the economy is what’s happening here. And it’s the way America is supposed to work.”
Here is where we really disagree. In most cases the business is not impacted by an employee or associate’s opinion and so should not be able to punish them without evidence that it caused harm. And I especially disagree with the proposition that its OK for Americans to be afraid to express their opinions and be forced into silence for the sake of political correctness, or to be persecuted by intolerant leftist mobs.