I interrupt yet again my review of Ryan Patrick Hanley’s latest book on Adam Smith in order to express my opinion about Mark Cuban’s controversial decision to cancel the national anthem during his team’s home games: although I strongly disagree with his decision, I condemn in even stronger terms the NBA Commissioner’s ham-fisted decision to compel the playing of the national anthem at all games. That is, in my libertarian opinion, pro-sports franchises should be free to make this decision without league interference.
I respect your opinion and all. However, I am unsure of mine. Doesn’t the league itself count as a private ( non-government ) organization.
Despite it being a “private” entity its concentrated decision-making authority makes the NBA tyrannical?
Does the NBA relinquish its designation as a private organization once it cooperates with or bargains with elected officials for self-serving benefits (tax-dollar funded venues, relaxed regulations, etc.)?
I also understand that this distinction becomes even more murky due to the fact that NBA teams are franchises. Meaning that we need to analyze the governing actions of the league and the owners of the teams separately.
Those are excellent questions! I get what you are saying, but to the extent the central offices of the NBA, NFL, MLB, NCAA, etc. are operating as illegal restraints of trade, I have little sympathy for these organizations!
That actually makes sense. Kind of how the Supreme Court granted legal monopoly status to MLB. Alright, with that in mind, I will have to oppose the actions of the league.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/theweek.com/articles-amp/774406/how-mlb-gamed-way-into-baseball-monopoly