Reminder: NFL players kneeling for the Anthem was to protest racist Cops.

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

It probably has gotten lost the purpose of the kneeling, so let me remind atleast the people here, the reason that Colin Kaepernick started protesting it was because he would not praise a flag of a country that oppresses people of color.

I still don't see how kneeling is an act of defiance rather than one of submission. I mean, when I kneel I'm submitting to someone or something, right? I don't kneel in front of a person I don't respect.

Anyone who actually gives the protest a few minutes of thought would figure that out on their own. It doesn't make any sense for a bunch of athletes to spontaneously decide that they hate America and want to openly disrespect it for shits and giggles.

It's like Clinton's coal "gaffe." Because a single line was taken out-of-context from an entire paragraph, willfully misinterpreted, and relentlessly publicised, most of the US was under the impression that Clinton wanted to destroy the US coal mining industry apparently out of pure spite. Seriously, that was how they reported it.

No-one ever really stops and thinks about the fact that the logical implication of all these narratives is that a substantial chunk of Americans are filled with such a vicious and inexplicable hatred for America as a concept that they would go out of their way to insult and destroy it. They may as well just run a picture of Colin Kaepernick tying Lady Liberty to the train tracks.

PsychedelicDiamond:
I still don't see how kneeling is an act of defiance rather than one of submission. I mean, when I kneel I'm submitting to someone or something, right? I don't kneel in front of a person I respect.

Well, you're supposed to stand during the anthem. So kneeling is as far as you can go in the other direction without laying on the ground.

PsychedelicDiamond:
I still don't see how kneeling is an act of defiance rather than one of submission. I mean, when I kneel I'm submitting to someone or something, right? I don't kneel in front of a person I respect.

That's what makes the reaction to kneeling double-plus weird.

Sure, kneeling when you're supposed to be standing is, well, not what you're supposed to do, but it's not disrespectful.

altnameJag:

PsychedelicDiamond:
I still don't see how kneeling is an act of defiance rather than one of submission. I mean, when I kneel I'm submitting to someone or something, right? I don't kneel in front of a person I respect.

That's what makes the reaction to kneeling double-plus weird.

Sure, kneeling when you're supposed to be standing is, well, not what you're supposed to do, but it's not disrespectful.

On the one hand, yes. It's as respectful as you can be while protesting something.

On the other hand, comments about how the term "snowflake" is bandied about somewhat hypocritically come to mind.

Thaluikhain:
On the other hand, comments about how the term "snowflake" is bandied about somewhat hypocritically come to mind.

"Snowflake", like an awful lot of terms of modern political abuse, has no meaningful basis in empirical fact.

Stitch together half a dozen anecdotes from amongst a population of millions, use as proof that's what those millions think.

altnameJag:

PsychedelicDiamond:
I still don't see how kneeling is an act of defiance rather than one of submission. I mean, when I kneel I'm submitting to someone or something, right? I don't kneel in front of a person I respect.

That's what makes the reaction to kneeling double-plus weird.

Sure, kneeling when you're supposed to be standing is, well, not what you're supposed to do, but it's not disrespectful.

The reaction isn't that weird. It moves the conversation from being about police brutality to being about disrespect towards national symbols and veteran heroes.

I mean, if I wanted to show disrespect to a flag or symbol I wouldn't kneel - I'd turn my back on it.

But then again the idea that there is the national anthem at the start of most major DOMESTIC sporting events in the US and people are expected/encouraged to stand for it is creepy enough. I could get behind protesting for that cause alone, let alone whatever other bugbear one has with the way the US conducts itself.

Abomination:
I mean, if I wanted to show disrespect to a flag or symbol I wouldn't kneel - I'd turn my back on it.

But then again the idea that there is the national anthem at the start of most major DOMESTIC sporting events in the US and people are expected/encouraged to stand for it is creepy enough. I could get behind protesting for that cause alone, let alone whatever other bugbear one has with the way the US conducts itself.

Considering anthems at games in the US is a relatively recent phenomena, you know, to enforce patriotism... I find it creepy too.

trunkage:

Abomination:
I mean, if I wanted to show disrespect to a flag or symbol I wouldn't kneel - I'd turn my back on it.

But then again the idea that there is the national anthem at the start of most major DOMESTIC sporting events in the US and people are expected/encouraged to stand for it is creepy enough. I could get behind protesting for that cause alone, let alone whatever other bugbear one has with the way the US conducts itself.

Considering anthems at games in the US is a relatively recent phenomena, you know, to enforce patriotism... I find it creepy too.

I don't think it's that recent of a development, I remember as a kid several decades ago standing and removing my hat for the national anthem before the game started, at least at baseball games. This would have been pre-2001, so 9/11 would not have been the cause. Now all of the pageantry of fly overs for every game and football field sized flags are new, but that playing of the anthem is older. I also remember being on the field for the anthem in middle school sports, playing the anthem in the band for high school and the college I went to had a particular arrangement from at least the 1960's that we played.

mrglass08:

trunkage:

Abomination:
I mean, if I wanted to show disrespect to a flag or symbol I wouldn't kneel - I'd turn my back on it.

But then again the idea that there is the national anthem at the start of most major DOMESTIC sporting events in the US and people are expected/encouraged to stand for it is creepy enough. I could get behind protesting for that cause alone, let alone whatever other bugbear one has with the way the US conducts itself.

Considering anthems at games in the US is a relatively recent phenomena, you know, to enforce patriotism... I find it creepy too.

I don?t think it?s that recent of a development, I remember as a kid several decades ago standing and removing my hat for the national anthem before the game started, at least at baseball games. This would have been pre-2001, so 9/11 would not have been the cause. Now all of the pageantry of fly overs for every game and football field sized flags are new, but that playing of the anthem is older. I also remember being on the field for the anthem in middle school sports, playing the anthem in the band for high school and the college I went to had a particular arrangement from at least the 1960?s that we played.

Recent or not, I hope we can all agree that the idea of it is some form of Orwellian creep.

Abomination:

mrglass08:

trunkage:
Considering anthems at games in the US is a relatively recent phenomena, you know, to enforce patriotism... I find it creepy too.

I don?t think it?s that recent of a development, I remember as a kid several decades ago standing and removing my hat for the national anthem before the game started, at least at baseball games. This would have been pre-2001, so 9/11 would not have been the cause. Now all of the pageantry of fly overs for every game and football field sized flags are new, but that playing of the anthem is older. I also remember being on the field for the anthem in middle school sports, playing the anthem in the band for high school and the college I went to had a particular arrangement from at least the 1960?s that we played.

Recent or not, I hope we can all agree that the idea of it is some form of Orwellian creep.

As far as I know, it was already in place by the time when 1984 was published.

CaitSeith:
As far as I know, it was already in place by the time when 1984 was published.

I mean, every author needs inspiration, I guess.

CaitSeith:

Abomination:

mrglass08:

I don?t think it?s that recent of a development, I remember as a kid several decades ago standing and removing my hat for the national anthem before the game started, at least at baseball games. This would have been pre-2001, so 9/11 would not have been the cause. Now all of the pageantry of fly overs for every game and football field sized flags are new, but that playing of the anthem is older. I also remember being on the field for the anthem in middle school sports, playing the anthem in the band for high school and the college I went to had a particular arrangement from at least the 1960?s that we played.

Recent or not, I hope we can all agree that the idea of it is some form of Orwellian creep.

As far as I know, it was already in place by the time when 1984 was published.

Orwell wrote his book back in 1948. The anthem and flag thing was a product of the 1950s and the cold war. He didn't predate it by much, but he was first.

Nike is upsetting racists some more by doing ads with Kaepernick about the whole protesting cops murdering black people, which is the whole point of the protest, despite all the people trying to turn it about patriotism as a diversion tactic.

Some have even begun burning their Nike clothing, cause I guess they did not feel like hauling wooden crosses anymore to burn.

Saelune:

Some have even begun burning their Nike clothing, cause I guess they did not feel like hauling wooden crosses anymore to burn.

"How can we leverage racism to sell more socks and shoes?" -some sock and shoe salesman somewhere, probably

Seanchaidh:
snip

Atleast they think OPPOSING racism is the more profitable choice. No, this doesn't erase all the evil Nike has and will do, but better some good come out of it than just more bad.

Great, I forgot about this thread. I was trying to figure out where to put this in.

Yay!

The article and the former Rep's viewpoints isn't nothing new. I just want to point out her rhetoric that it's weirdly common now.

In her resignation statement, Ms Malony apologised for her remarks about the protests, which she said had been "in poor taste."

"I apologise for my distasteful, inappropriate and insensitive social media posts," she added.

"Those that know me know that I come from a diverse family that represents modern America.

"I know my posts and comments were disrespectful to not only the people that I love, but families across the country.

"I know I am a better person than this and, as I step away from these public positions, I will work to show everyone who I truly am."

Honestly, I would have respected her more (not liked her, but respected) if she just doubled down. Instead, the same bullshit excuse of "This isn't who I am". Roseanne did it. People from Canada do it, Radio announcers... This bullshit script of "I got angry, so I got racist" kills me.

Do you know what happens when you get angry? You drop pretenses and you go with who you are. You guys have support nowadays, just be who you are. If you believe enough to have these views, be strong enough to suffer the consequences of them.

Saelune:

Seanchaidh:
snip

Atleast they think OPPOSING racism is the more profitable choice. No, this doesn't erase all the evil Nike has and will do, but better some good come out of it than just more bad.

Hey they may use child labour in sweat shops but thank God they're not racists.

Whitbane:

Saelune:

Seanchaidh:
snip

Atleast they think OPPOSING racism is the more profitable choice. No, this doesn't erase all the evil Nike has and will do, but better some good come out of it than just more bad.

Hey they may use child labour in sweat shops but thank God they're not racists.

So do you boycott Nike out of principle? Just curious.

Whitbane:

Saelune:

Seanchaidh:
snip

Atleast they think OPPOSING racism is the more profitable choice. No, this doesn't erase all the evil Nike has and will do, but better some good come out of it than just more bad.

Hey they may use child labour in sweat shops but thank God they're not racists.

I haven't gotten anything from Nike in a long time, and even then it was cause I used to not care about what shoes I wore as a small child.

With or without this ad campaign, Nike wasnt going anywhere. If this can atleast help oppose racism, then it is a silver lining.

Or alternatively 'Hey, cops may murder black people, but atleast they dont use child labour...they just shoot black kids though'.

erttheking:

Whitbane:

Saelune:
Atleast they think OPPOSING racism is the more profitable choice. No, this doesn't erase all the evil Nike has and will do, but better some good come out of it than just more bad.

Hey they may use child labour in sweat shops but thank God they're not racists.

So do you boycott Nike out of principle? Just curious.

Whatever the reason may be; in a capitalist society, no boycott is more effective than massively buying the company's product to set it on fire... I suppose?

*shrug*

CaitSeith:

erttheking:

Whitbane:

Hey they may use child labour in sweat shops but thank God they're not racists.

So do you boycott Nike out of principle? Just curious.

Whatever the reason may be; in a capitalist society, no boycott is more effective than massively buying the company's product to set it on fire... I suppose?

*shrug*

True, I'm just curious as to whether or not he actually gives a shit about the sweat shops or is just looking for an excuse to not care about police brutality.

I think I know what the answer is, but I'm just checking.

erttheking:
True, I'm just curious as to whether or not he actually gives a shit about the sweat shops or is just looking for an excuse to not care about police brutality.

It's perfectly consistent to respect Kaepernick and be opposed to mainstream companies hijacking protest movements for financial gain. (*cough*Pepsi*cough*)

Because let's not pretend that's not the driver here.

Catnip1024:

erttheking:
True, I'm just curious as to whether or not he actually gives a shit about the sweat shops or is just looking for an excuse to not care about police brutality.

It's perfectly consistent to respect Kaepernick and be opposed to mainstream companies hijacking protest movements for financial gain. (*cough*Pepsi*cough*)

Because let's not pretend that's not the driver here.

We are in agreement. They polled the numbers and saw 'who' was wearing Nike, I believe.

But here's the thing. If it was for a financial payday... That's even more powerful. There's nothing more powerful than Money in America. And if Money backs a movement, America is forced to pay attention.

And pay attention it did.

There was a comment in this post. It's one of the embedded tweets.

First the @NFL forces me to choose between my favorite sport and my country. I chose country. Then @Nike forces me to choose between my favorite shoes and my country. Since when did the American Flag and the National Anthem become offensive?

I have to wonder if people are really not getting it, or are just willfully ignorant. Literally everyone is telling you it's about how America is ok with Police Brutality, and how that's a bad thing. And how do people react? By siding with the Police, which is an oppressive regime in some parts.

This begs the question. Do we side with an idea and borders? Or should we side with fellow citizens?

Nike have dropped his ad, although he is doing the voiceover for an advert featuring Serena Williams and Odell Beckham junior. To be honest, Nike have disapointed me with this action.

Catnip1024:

erttheking:
True, I'm just curious as to whether or not he actually gives a shit about the sweat shops or is just looking for an excuse to not care about police brutality.

It's perfectly consistent to respect Kaepernick and be opposed to mainstream companies hijacking protest movements for financial gain. (*cough*Pepsi*cough*)

Because let's not pretend that's not the driver here.

No one pretends that.

ObsidianJones:

I have to wonder if people are really not getting it, or are just willfully ignorant.

My money goes on the later. As with every falsehood that Trump says, his followers went into hands-on-ears-la-la-la mode the moment he declared kneeling during the National Anthem as anti-patriotic on Twitter.

NIKE does child labor still, https://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=88176&page=1

I am soo glad that people can over look the issue of children who are tortured and murdered. Present NIKE's attention as a silver lining to help end racism.Yet ignore the fact any NIKE products support child labor which is slavery. Brilliant, it's like protesting NAZISM by buying CHINESE products that were made by child political prisoners.People are letting one evil slip by because it "benefits"their agendas. It is so beyond hypocritical it can cause one's own head to spin.

The worst thing about this is how the markets work, either way NIKE is on top. Idiots, will no-doubt buy their products in a sign of solidarity as a statement.Not knowing or really caring what NIKE does to make their shoes and shirts for their protest. NIKE knows this and depending on how long the attention is, will start "guerrilla marketing" those targeted demographics hard.End of racism is fine, but whenever a corporation is associated with a movement that is brilliant marketing.

ObsidianJones:
But here's the thing. If it was for a financial payday... That's even more powerful. There's nothing more powerful than Money in America. And if Money backs a movement, America is forced to pay attention.

Money backed the use of slave labour. Following money is often an absolutely terrible thing, regardless of whatever power it wields.

Particularly when you have a global corporation more interested in its bottom line than social cohesion hurling rocks into an already tumultuous period of time.

I have to wonder if people are really not getting it, or are just willfully ignorant. Literally everyone is telling you it's about how America is ok with Police Brutality, and how that's a bad thing. And how do people react? By siding with the Police, which is an oppressive regime in some parts.

This begs the question. Do we side with an idea and borders? Or should we side with fellow citizens?

As I pointed out before, the problem is far too much dehumanisation on both sides. It's not siding with the police to point out that police aren't an amorphous blob and that the vast majority are just regular human beings doing a job. In a poorly set-up system which has no intention of training them and equipping them in the optimal manner for actual policing, rather than combat.

It's not siding against them to point out that reform is needed and that more accountability is needed.

The problem is the people making it an us vs them, treating people as crowds rather than individuals. Which is dead convenient if you are an advertiser, because if you get people thinking as crowds you only need to tick one box, rather than figure out how to get a host of individuals to buy your inferior shoes.

Whatever it was for, they're morons for doing it. Politics should not be involved in sports, movies or the arts. These are things that should be universal and international and cross boundaries in the name of athleticism and competition. That isn't to say movies or the arts cannot be about something, having a deeper message is not just fine, it's necessary for good art.

Catnip1024:

ObsidianJones:
But here's the thing. If it was for a financial payday... That's even more powerful. There's nothing more powerful than Money in America. And if Money backs a movement, America is forced to pay attention.

Money backed the use of slave labour. Following money is often an absolutely terrible thing, regardless of whatever power it wields.

Particularly when you have a global corporation more interested in its bottom line than social cohesion hurling rocks into an already tumultuous period of time.

If morality was enough to make things better, We would all be Gods of our own world.

But the fact is Gods we are not. It takes something to grease the gears of change, as it were. And that's promdinantly money.

Most products we enjoy come various types of slave labor or exploited labor. Be it the Prison-Industrial Complex, Illegally underpaid workers in America[/url], or just have companies downsized to work in India or Mexico for substantially less for what a worker would be paid in America.

Likewise, if Trump believed anything he was saying, he wouldn't have hired undocumented (thereby illegal) workers for his businesses. Mar-a-lago would be a different shade of things.

I don't condone or praise any of Nike's services. I don't buy them either. But money equals clout in this world.

As I pointed out before, the problem is far too much dehumanisation on both sides. It's not siding with the police to point out that police aren't an amorphous blob and that the vast majority are just regular human beings doing a job. In a poorly set-up system which has no intention of training them and equipping them in the optimal manner for actual policing, rather than combat.

It's not siding against them to point out that reform is needed and that more accountability is needed.

The problem is the people making it an us vs them, treating people as crowds rather than individuals. Which is dead convenient if you are an advertiser, because if you get people thinking as crowds you only need to tick one box, rather than figure out how to get a host of individuals to buy your inferior shoes.

While very true, one side gets financial, government, and citizen backing. One side gets to police itself and threaten people and have it written away with training and counseling.

The other side does not. The other side doesn't get to say "I went out of line and I'm giving myself 1 month's house arrest and I will not commit that crime again".

Everyone's a person with real problems. Everyone can have an off-day. One side is protected. And that side has power to ruin other people's lives if they see fit, and will easily expect the nation to accept their side of things.

As long as cops still attempt to use the Blue Wall of Silence and to Police itself, it's a threat. Because when you put on a uniform and you become higher than the average citizen, there is a dynamic change. I do not get to take an officer to my home to sit and think about what he said or how he said it to me. An officer does. I need to watch my mouth and they can go off on me, you, or anyone they deal with.

And people are ok with that. Too much power, very little accountability. And everyone who wears that uniform has that capability. Definitely, not everyone is bad. There are legitimate heroes on the police force. But it only takes a handful to ruin a number of lives no gangbanger can ever hope to come close to. That's a problem and it needs to be addressed.

KingsGambit:
Whatever it was for, they're morons for doing it. Politics should not be involved in sports, movies or the arts. These are things that should be universal and international and cross boundaries in the name of athleticism and competition. That isn't to say movies or the arts cannot be about something, having a deeper message is not just fine, it's necessary for good art.

That's naive at best

Including the national anthem is itself political

And quite frankly politics and lives are more important than competition and athleticism. That's the kind of thing you can spout when it's not your life lol

Not to mention worldviews just seep into movies anyways and art is a perfect vehicle to send a message including a political one

I'd prefer not to have art neutered of meaningful contemporary messages to protect the sensibilities of those who are less affected by the status quo lol

I've always found Nike's footwear line to be inadequate for the wider-footed gentleman.

That being said, this whole story and sponsorship is peek 2018.

The Decapitated Centaur:
Including the national anthem is itself political

No, it isn't. It is not political to play a national anthem.

The Decapitated Centaur:
And quite frankly politics and lives are more important than competition and athleticism.

If that's true, it's interesting that politicians don't get paid nearly the same as sports stars. But I agree with you, politics are more important, I never suggested they weren't. I said that sports wasn't the place for them, and it isn't. Politicising sports can only harm the competition and the spectacle. As soon as any politics are introduced, it will alienate the others. It can be seen in the NFL where people have lost jobs, fans have turned their noses up at it. People don't want to watch it for political opinion, they watch it for the reasons I mentioned before.

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here