By now, you’ve likely heard about Nike’s Colin Kaepernick sponsorship. I have previously shared my thoughts on the backlash to Kaepernick’s kneeling, where the protest is often framed as “disrespecting the flag.” In short, I viewed the criticisms as a good example of a double standard. Free speech is the most cherished principle for the right. It is used to defend outright racist statements and protect the statues of racist historical figures. Yet, this same freedom of speech and the associated right to protest becomes a bad thing when wielded by someone who is trying to tackle the issue of systemic racism. If you can call Kaepernick disrespectful to veterans, and then support a draft-dodging president who criticized a prisoner of war for getting captured, you are being disingenuous.
Kneeling has nothing to do with the military or the veterans, it is about bringing attention to police brutality that disproportionately affects black people. The military, veterans and “the flag” get brought up by people who want to derail the conversation. Now, some people say (emphasis on the word “say”) they support protest as a whole, but think that Kaepernick is going about it wrong.
Either, his form of protest insults the flag, or it’s just the wrong venue. Tim Wise actually did a great piece on Jim Crow-era protests, using survey data to show how most white people during the Jim Crow era thought that Martin Luther King Jr.’s protests were the wrong way to fight for equality. King’s methods were viewed as too divisive and survey data reveals that many white people also believed equality was already present. Keep in mind that some of these surveys were taken prior to black people getting the right to vote.
The phrase “history repeats itself” can seem trite sometimes; a theory that has little basis in reality. Reactions to Kaepernick and arguments against him are a great object lesson. I bet that some of the same people criticizing Kaepernick now, for bringing politics into football, would have objected to sit-ins back in the 60s because sit-ins were bringing politics to lunch time. Peaceful protest has a long history of being viewed as the wrong way to go about things, or as divisive.
For the people choosing to boycott Nike, fine. That is your choice. However, realize that if you cut up or set fire to your Nike products, Nike still has your money from those products. A boycott works best before you buy from a company.
I came across this article, which brings up a point that is actually well thought out. The author doesn’t worry about the flag or veterans, he worries that Kaepernick’s original message will be crushed by corporate branding: Nike might give him some face time, but not truly give him a platform to discuss the issues that led to him kneeling in the first place. Now this is an issue that is relevant. After all, can the company built off sweatshops be trusted to truly care about social justice? We will see. For now, power to Kaepernick and respect to Nike (for the moment).
Leave a Reply