Is there a more self-destructive group in the universe than the far left? I'd posit not, and the reaction to Caitlin Clark setting the WNBA on fire is proof positive.

Providing the perfect illustration of that was "The View" on Thursday. During the show, host Sonny Hostin explained why she feels like Clark is so popular. You see, it's not because of anything happening on the court. Rather, it's because of "white privilege" and the fact that Clark isn't gay: 

“I do think that there is a thing called pretty privilege. There is a thing called White privilege. There is a thing called tall privilege, and we have to acknowledge that, and so part of it is about race, because if you think about the Brittney Griners of the world, why did she have to go to play in Russia? Because they wouldn’t pay her,” Hostin said, referring to the WNBA.

Look, I'm married, so I'm not going to comment too much on the "pretty privilege" thing, but I don't think the broad national consensus is that Clark is overly attractive. I'm not throwing any shade there. I'm just speaking to the idea that her popularity is based on her physical appearance as Hostin suggests. I see no evidence of that, and certainly, there have been WNBA players who are "pretty" before.

RELATED: Charles Barkley Tells It As Only He Can in Response to Criticism Over Caitlin Clark

With that said, let's talk about the "white privilege" assertion. I mean, had Michael Jordan, LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, and Shaquille O'Neal been black, no one would know their names, right? Clearly, there's so much racism surrounding basketball fandom. 

The simple explanation for why Clark is so popular is that she's fun to watch. Brittney Griner is not (she's also obnoxious, and people tend to not gravitate to that), and that's been the WNBA's problem for a long time. It's simply been a bad product. Clark has changed that, at least temporarily, regarding the games she plays in. I'm not even sure the hype will last long-term, as it takes more than one player to sustain a league's popularity, but her success is not because she's white:

“Now, Caitlin Clark is bringing this money, these sponsorships, we hope, into the league and other players will benefit from it. But I do think that she is more relatable to more people because she’s White, because she’s attractive, and unfortunately, there still is that stigma against the LGBTQ+ community,” Hostin said.

Is Hostin suggesting that every WNBA player before Clark was a lesbian and that the "stigma against the LGBTQ+ community" kept ratings in the toilet? Well, that makes no sense at all. I mean, I'm sure there's a higher percentage of LGBT-whatever in most women's sports, but clearly, there have been plenty of straight players in the WNBA.

I will say this, though. When Hostin says that Clark is relatable, she's getting closer to the truth. Yes, her popularity is mostly about how entertaining she is to watch, but there is something to be said about not being an outspoken political ideologue. Griner knelt for the National Anthem for years until after her detainment in Russia, at which point she decided the song "hits different." By contrast, Clark does offer a bridge for people who just want to watch basketball without being inundated with far-left messaging.

All that aside, what Hostin and others are doing is incredibly self-destructive. Before Clark entered the league, WNBA players were flying coach and making McDonald's wages. That wasn't because of racism. It was because the league was making no money (and was being bailed out every year by the NBA). For the moment, Clark has changed that calculus. Anyone who previously supported the WNBA should be ecstatic. Why destroy that over faux racial grievance?