The Outstater
Envy on the Court
For the use of the membership only.
THE CAITLIN CLARK controversy gives us a chance to argue the point that America is not divided by race (or no more than any other society since the beginning of time) but rather is divided by envy. And that, sadly, is on the Chennedy Carter side of things.
Envy, as regular readers of this space know, is a fascinating subject — and a powerful if ugly social force. Socialism, for instance, being otherwise nonsensical, seems to survive on an endless supply of envy as does Joe Biden’s Democrat Party.
To back up for a moment. Clark is a star player for the Indiana Fever in the Women’s National Basketball Association (WNBA). Chennedy Carter is a player for the Chicago Sky who fouled Clark so brutally in a recent game that it would have been a criminal assault had it occurred on the street. Carter, just prior to the assault, seemed to mouth a malediction.
Applying envy analysis to the Clark-Carter incident is Dr. Anne Hendershott, a professor of sociology and author of “The Politics of Envy” writing in the American Spectator:
“In some ways, envy is the worst of the deadly sins because it leads to so many of the others. The resentment that accompanies envy often erupts in the kind of anger and resentful rage we are seeing on the basketball court. It is inextricably intertwined with pride. Often called the ‘sin of sins,’ the sin of pride is — like the sin of envy — a narcissistic preoccupation with self. The truly envious are the truly prideful who believe that no one is more deserving of advantages and rewards than they are.”
In a civilized model, which the WNBA ain’t, Carter would have been removed from society for a time. Instead, she was given an infraction (later upgraded to flagrant) and allowed to continue play. Indeed, several of her teammates and not a few sports commentators have applauded her. She is enjoying a degree of fame as a “victim” of racism heretofore denied anyone paid $64,000 a year to play a game.
Racism? How is that? For an answer, you will need to dive into the sociology of envy.
To begin, what makes envy fascinating is that it is the only human failing that is rarely publicly confessed. You hear people admit to being thieves, pedophiles, even murderers (all for good reason, of course) but not to being envious. That is because as the envious they are admitting to being both inferior and unwilling to do anything about it — not an attractive look.
A related thing about the envious is that they, unlike the merely jealous, don’t have a plan to improve their situation but only one to degrade yours. Victimism is all they know, South Africa, Haiti, Chicago serving as working examples.
So the assault on Clark was not envious but justified because of pent up frustration born of supposed unfairness in renumeration, which, her supporters claim, is prima fascia evidence of racism. White WNBA stars are said to be unfairly worth more to marketers.This is in a league, please know, made up of less than 10 percent white starters playing for what might be called plantation wages. (Recall the Washington Generals, hapless traveling companions of the Harlem Globetrotters.)
Anyway, does Carter’s rationale hold up? We call as our judge and jury Mr. Michael “white people buy shoes too” Jordan, a man remarkably free of either envy or anyone in his chosen field worthy of the emotion. And Clark is proving in gate receipts and viewership that she is in fact worth more than Carter, racial identification or basketball skills aside. Do we now require WNBA fans to buy endorsed products in some sort of melanin ratio?
Chennedy Carter needs to be called out. If she isn’t, those with her mindset will bring us all down. — tcl
Comments...