What Fun Productions wrote:
This seems a bit vague... would you mind going into more detail?

What don't you understand?

Tony From Syracuse wrote:
I sometimes find it hard to believe these type of protests are actually truly about the ideology. I think its more about simple evolutionary notions, in this case the peacock. I think they simply want to draw attention to themselves and become an icon, and being rich already these types can be cavalier about any jackassed thing they want to do, they do it knowing they wont really suffer any real hardship for their protest penalty or not but ultimately its all really about......"look at me".

Perhaps, but I seem to recall that Kaepernick did not seek out attention.  He was happy just quietly sitting on the bench, but the media noticed & sought him out, and he lost control of the narrative soon thereafter.

I can't say I know any of these players well enough to guess at their motivations, but I do note that many of these players get involved with their communities & families to a very large degree.  At least some of them probably have pure motives, I think.

Tony From Syracuse wrote:
I sometimes find it hard to believe these type of protests are actually truly about the ideology. I think its more about simple evolutionary notions, in this case the peacock. I think they simply want to draw attention to themselves and become an icon, and being rich already these types can be cavalier about any jackassed thing they want to do, they do it knowing they wont really suffer any real hardship for their protest penalty or not but ultimately its all really about......"look at me".

I pretty much agree with this, but not as it applies to these players and their kneeling. I have every reason to suspect that it actually applies much more accurately to the general public and their stance on stuff like the flag and patriotic gestures and... well, the vast majority of the things they claim to stand for.

The players, by virtue of being in the NFL, don't actually need any extra attention or validation. They're all rich and famous by definition, and there's nobody they need to impress who isn't already impressed by their status as such. So the easiest thing for all of them to do is just go with the flow, don't make waves, do exactly as you're told, just shut up and play the game, and happily collect all that fame and fortune without much controversy. Yet some players are risking all of that to make a statement... a statement that definitely does not have the seal of approval as orthodox behavior from the status quo powers-that-be.

On the other hand, any average random nobody can pretend to be offended about the players' gesture, and pay empty lip service to the flag and the country and patriotism and blah blah blah, and there's no downside to such pretense... after all, such empty lip service does have the seal of approval as orthodox behavior from the status quo powers-that-be. Nobody's gonna raise an eyebrow at any of that. So I suspect those people might very likely be lying about being outraged over some player taking a knee during the anthem, and that's because those folks are usually the same ones who have previously uttered other, far-more-highly-questionable stuff which, IMHO, is pretty much bullshit that is only meant to impress others who consume that same bullshit.

So I think the players are sincere in their gesture, because they actually have something to lose in the process... something that the average random nobody could never even hope to achieve, no matter how hard they tried. And I suspect that the vast majority of people who claim to be offended by their gesture are, as I stated, pretty much lying through their teeth, because they've already given off plenty of clues that not only is their entire worldview is one big lie anyway, but also that they're A-OK with it, because there's no risk involved whatsoever. Nothing's at stake. They've literally got nothing of any significance to lose at all in the process by pretending to be Mr. Righteously-Offended Flag-Waving Patriot... or any other of the cheap ideological costumes that they casually wear while prancing around signifying at others in hope of at least even the most cursory effortless passing acknowledgment.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
Perhaps, but I seem to recall that Kaepernick did not seek out attention.  He was happy just quietly sitting on the bench, but the media noticed & sought him out, and he lost control of the narrative soon thereafter.

I can't say I know any of these players well enough to guess at their motivations, but I do note that many of these players get involved with their communities & families to a very large degree.  At least some of them probably have pure motives, I think.

We havent found much to agree about in this thread.

But, in this, I believe you have it right.

As I remember it, initially, Kaepernick did his thing, and called no external attention to it. Initially he was just sitting for the anthem. He began taking a knee several games into the protest, as I understand it at the suggestion of another player.

As such, I believe when he began, his intention was to quietly protest systemic police racial bias in his own way.

As you say, it soon became something else. You and I differ as to what he could have done to regain control, but that is a different issue.

Also as I understand it, he has continued his community work, quietly contributing money and his time to smaller, local community efforts, all aimed at improving opportunity in depressed neighborhoods. He has donated something on the order of a million dollars.  Hardly an insignificant contribution.

Hard to question his commitment to community improvement.

I just wish he had found a better way to put his message in front of the people who needed to hear it the most.

What Fun Productions wrote:
No, you miss the point. People DO NOT WANT politics in their sports. People do not want the flag or the anthem disrespected. People made a big deal out of it because it was un-American by every measure, even though every American has free speech rights. Time and place. Poor decision making by some players.

I understand it is "un-American by every measure" and very "poor decision making by some players", I am fully with you there.  However, it is very American to make poor decisions and also to do things sometimes that are un-American.  That's what makes the USA the best country on the entire planet.  I don't have to like it, it's just how it is.  No one is harmed by their kneeling except those who allow themselves to be offended.

On another side, those kneeling seem to believe they are protesting against something they feel needs to be addressed.  How many other things are more American than that?  It does not matter if others feel it is the wrong place and time or that it is misdirected.  You have to respect their will to defy the hand that feeds them in order to support their cause.

But what did the NFL accomplish by making the new rules?  They re-ignited the controversy that will keep politics in the sport for the entire next season.  They also now have people on both sides of the issue upset with them.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
Perhaps, but I seem to recall that Kaepernick did not seek out attention.  He was happy just quietly sitting on the bench, but the media noticed & sought him out, and he lost control of the narrative soon thereafter.

I can't say I know any of these players well enough to guess at their motivations, but I do note that many of these players get involved with their communities & families to a very large degree.  At least some of them probably have pure motives, I think.

rfordphotos wrote:
We havent found much to agree about in this thread.

But, in this, I believe you have it right.

As I remember it, initially, Kaepernick did his thing, and called no external attention to it. Initially he was just sitting for the anthem. He began taking a knee several games into the protest, as I understand it at the suggestion of another player.

As such, I believe when he began, his intention was to quietly protest systemic police racial bias in his own way.

As you say, it soon became something else. You and I differ as to what he could have done to regain control, but that is a different issue.  ...

Hard to question his commitment to community improvement.

I just wish he had found a better way to put his message in front of the people who needed to hear it the most.

Well, I'm not clear that Kaepernick is a great leader or spokesperson for the pursuit of social justice.  I believe that he didn't intend to be the poster child for this movement, and perhaps he lacked the experience & inclination to "regain control".

Some here have questioned the sincerity of these "millionaires" protesting for racial justice.  Fair enough, but as others pointed out, many of these players have come from "humble" (i.e. low income) backgrounds, and by protesting, they have a lot to lose.  As it is clear (as in the case of Sterling Brown, Sterling Brown video proves fame and fortune won’t protect athletes from police abuse), many of these players might have experienced these issues personally.

What Fun Productions wrote:
No, you miss the point. People DO NOT WANT politics in their sports. People do not want the flag or the anthem disrespected. People made a big deal out of it because it was un-American by every measure, even though every American has free speech rights. Time and place. Poor decision making by some players.

ernst tischler wrote:
I understand it is "un-American by every measure" and very "poor decision making by some players", I am fully with you there.  However, it is very American to make poor decisions and also to do things sometimes that are un-American.  That's what makes the USA the best country on the entire planet.  I don't have to like it, it's just how it is.  No one is harmed by their kneeling except those who allow themselves to be offended.

On another side, those kneeling seem to believe they are protesting against something they feel needs to be addressed.  How many other things are more American than that?  It does not matter if others feel it is the wrong place and time or that it is misdirected.  You have to respect their will to defy the hand that feeds them in order to support their cause.

But what did the NFL accomplish by making the new rules?  They re-ignited the controversy that will keep politics in the sport for the entire next season.  They also now have people on both sides of the issue upset with them.

I think political protests are as American as you can get.  The genius to our Constitution is that it can be changed & improved over time.  There are always those who don't want change or don't want to be reminded that things need to change, but those protests that make people uncomfortable are exactly the protests that make people think and are perhaps necessary to get change implemented.

No one was comfortable during the protests against the War in Vietnam, and indeed, people died for protesting the war, but perhaps that was necessary to getting that war shut down.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
I think political protests are as American as you can get.  The genius to our Constitution is that it can be changed & improved over time.  There are always those who don't want change or don't want to be reminded that things need to change, but those protests that make people uncomfortable are exactly the protests that make people think and are perhaps necessary to get change implemented.

No one was comfortable during the protests against the War in Vietnam, and indeed, people died for protesting the war, but perhaps that was necessary to getting that war shut down.

No one denies their right to protest. Just not on the job. Their method of protest actually hurt their cause. Too bad. All the dialog is about their actions, not their issue. Poor decision making by some players.

Skydancer Photos wrote:
Since this thread has clearly been deemed appropriate by admins, I will go ahead and ask in all earnestness and curiosity...
To the persons here who are against NFL players protesting black oppression in America, are any of you persons of color?

Does it matter?  Should it?

If so, then should the white/people not black opinion carry less weight?
A white man started this thread.

I'm a white woman from the northeast suburbs but I lived in major cities and have friends of diverse religions/races, etc.

https://www.bustle.com/articles/183105- … nal-anthem

Just sayin'... if you're into data/statistics.  That doesn't mean I don't care about violence to any racial group.  I do.

Kaepernick's refusal to stand during the national anthem comes as a protest to widespread racialized police violence across the country. According to the Guardian's data on U.S. police killings, black Americans are more than twice as likely to be killed by police than white Americans — and these officers most often get away with doing so. Black Americans also make up almost half of the total population of incarcerated Americans, according to the NAACP. This is so important to keep in mind, especially because African-Americans make up just 13 percent of the total U.S. population.

Skydancer Photos wrote:
Since this thread has clearly been deemed appropriate by admins, I will go ahead and ask in all earnestness and curiosity...
To the persons here who are against NFL players protesting black oppression in America, are any of you persons of color?

Yeah, I am kinda of a weird pale pink.....thats a color, right?

/end sarcasm

So, if you disagree you are a racist? Thanks. Everyone has been wanting to say it, you finally got it out.

Why is it so difficult for you (collectively, not just you Skydancer) to separate the issue Kaepernick was protesting (Rampant systemic racial bias in the US police) and showing disrespect for a symbol many people of all races, colors and creeds gave their lives for?

Why do you (again, collectively) believe that because I dont like the --form-- his protest takes that I dont support his position about the main issue ?

In my eye, the flag he disrespects is the symbol of the sacrifices others made to give him the right to voice his opinions. I believe he could have brought forth his issue without disrespecting those people.

Everybody has a right to think and believe what they choose, but to be honest, I am appalled by the narrow minds here who cant separate one issue from another.

rfordphotos wrote:

Yeah, I am kinda of a weird pale pink.....thats a color, right?

/end sarcasm

So, if you disagree you are a racist? Thanks. Everyone has been wanting to say it, you finally got it out.

Why is it so difficult for you (collectively, not just you Skydancer) to separate the issue Kaepernick was protesting (Rampant systemic racial bias in the US police) and showing disrespect for a symbol many people of all races, colors and creeds gave their lives for?

Why do you (again, collectively) believe that because I dont like the --form-- his protest takes that I dont support his position about the main issue ?

In my eye, the flag he disrespects is the symbol of the sacrifices others made to give him the right to voice his opinions. I believe he could have brought forth his issue without disrespecting those people.

Everybody has a right to think and believe what they choose, but to be honest, I am appalled by the narrow minds here who cant separate one issue from another.

This is exactly how I feel.
Thank you.  Not just because I agree with you, but making the point.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
I think political protests are as American as you can get.  The genius to our Constitution is that it can be changed & improved over time.  There are always those who don't want change or don't want to be reminded that things need to change, but those protests that make people uncomfortable are exactly the protests that make people think and are perhaps necessary to get change implemented.

No one was comfortable during the protests against the War in Vietnam, and indeed, people died for protesting the war, but perhaps that was necessary to getting that war shut down.

What Fun Productions wrote:
No one denies their right to protest. Just not on the job. Their method of protest actually hurt their cause. Too bad. All the dialog is about their actions, not their issue. Poor decision making by some players.

First, it's not clear to me that Kaepernick started out with the intention to do a public protest.  He just chose to sit quietly during the anthem -- he did not seek out attention, I think.  There was no plan or strategy here.

Second, a necessary strategy of any effective protest is to get noticed, and that sometimes means getting in people's faces.  A quiet protest out in the middle of nowhere is not likely to get noticed.  It is the objective of a demonstration to get noticed by any means possible.  So, go off to an obscure location with no press coverage -- what's the point?  Disrupt traffic and you get noticed.

Third, you thinking that their method of protesting is "actually hurting" might be an indication that the protesting is working.

Fourth, I am kinda conflicted protesting "on the job".  Taking a knee while wearing a team uniform could be confusing.  If I was an owner, I might request that the players wear a cloak or a blanket to cover their uniform.  On the other hand, the players are paid to play the game, and the anthem is performed before the game starts.  On the third hand, what's with performing the anthem before a game in the first place?  It didn't used to get performed -- why is it necessary to perform the anthem anyway? 

I think the line is fuzzy.  Some teams (amateur, school, professional) have someone lead the team in prayer, and chances are that prayer is a Christian prayer.  What about athletes who are atheists, Jewish, Wiccan, Muslim, or whatever?  Is being a certain religion a requirement of team participation?  Extending that -- is standing for the anthem a requirement for team participation?

rfordphotos wrote:
Yeah, I am kinda of a weird pale pink.....thats a color, right?

/end sarcasm

So, if you disagree you are a racist? Thanks. Everyone has been wanting to say it, you finally got it out.

Why is it so difficult for you (collectively, not just you Skydancer) to separate the issue Kaepernick was protesting (Rampant systemic racial bias in the US police) and showing disrespect for a symbol many people of all races, colors and creeds gave their lives for?

Why do you (again, collectively) believe that because I dont like the --form-- his protest takes that I dont support his position about the main issue ?

In my eye, the flag he disrespects is the symbol of the sacrifices others made to give him the right to voice his opinions. I believe he could have brought forth his issue without disrespecting those people.

Everybody has a right to think and believe what they choose, but to be honest, I am appalled by the narrow minds here who cant separate one issue from another.

*
As you pointed out with Looknsee, there isn't a lot we agree on here.  What I thought we did agree on, was to respect the point of view of the other person.  I do not believe that I have had a narrow mind on the issue, and I could say, right back at you.  I separate the issue from the form of protest.  That is why the form of protest is less isolating and polarizing to me.  While my initial reaction to burning the flag, because of the increase drama as opposed to kneeling to it, would be to recoil and close the avenues to discussion.  It is because I am able to separate the form of protest from the reason for the protest that I think dialogue is important. 

While I am opposed and sensitive to police using excessive force against minorities, I am not naive enough to think that excessive force is only used against minorities.  Being a stranger in an area is a good reason also.  It is often a function of the attitude of the cop, the department, or some other intangible.  Such as, the us against them mindset, where us are the cops and them is everybody else, and I mean everybody.  A white customer of mine got the shit beat of of him by three cops.  He did nothing wrong except to get lost in the wrong neighborhood and he was not the aggressor.  I haven't been beaten, but I have had a few instances of cops doing things that were not right. 

Furthermore, not all vets thinks as you do.  A number have expressed the sentiment that they might not like it, but they would (did) fight for your/my/their right to do it.  Would it be possible, if more people were willing to be part of the dialogue, that the protesters might be willing to change methods?  Again, that is how it changed from sitting to kneeling.  Just how effective is the stance, "I am not going to talk to them about A until they do B?"

The person that asked if any of those on one side were non-white, is not calling those with that point of view racists.  Why jump to that conclusion?  I asked much the same question when I asked if any of the comics were from a black person's point of view.  To ask if anyone here is a minority is to seek the point of view that you nor I can possibly have.  It works both ways.  Someone told me I was using racist rhetoric in this thread.  (WTF?)     And nobody, yet, has explained to me why kneeling is acceptable to God but not country.

Model Mayhem Edu wrote:
Just curious, for those that oppose the NFL players protesting during the anthem, do you also think Tommie Smith and John Carlos were wrong to protest at the 1968 Olympics?

It's considered one of the most powerful political protests in sporting history and one of the most iconic photos of the 20th century.



Does anyone really believe their protest would have been as effective if they chose to do it at some other time instead?

Of course their protest would have been less effective had they done it somewhere else.

In 1968, the raised fist was an unambiguous symbol of Black Power, with a clear meaning to everyone. It was on millions of posters across America. Smith and Carlos made the intent of their protests clear in the press afterwards, unlike Kaepernick who was initially silent with no clear message.

They were amateur athletes, taking advantage of the only world stage they were likely to ever occupy. They knew that a week after the Olympics were over, they would return to relative obscurity.

Kaepernick was a millionaire, who had guaranteed access to the press for at least the full football season, if not beyond. He had already been exposed to, and understood the workings of both print and social media on a national scale.

Of course, in 1968 social media didnt even exist as a way to communicate. In 1968 Smith and Carlos had very, very limited means to make a political statement, I dont believe Kaepernick was limited in in way, and indeed had many other options to choose.

The Olympic Games had long been a world political forum, regardless of the express prohibition of ANY political statements at the Games. Think about the Palestinian actions at the 1972 Olympics, just 4 years later.

1968 was an extremely eventful, violent year. We lost Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy to assassins. We saw the race riots burn down huge swaths of dozens of major US cities. We were arguably more divided as a nation that at any time since the Civil War. Every week literally millions were marching in the street to protest the war in Vietnam.

It is 50 years later, and the world is a different place, and different ways to get things done exist now.

So- I dont really see the two situations as all that similar.

rfordphotos wrote:
Everybody has a right to think and believe what they choose, but to be honest, I am appalled by the narrow minds here who cant separate one issue from another.

Hunter  GWPB wrote:
*
As you pointed out with Looknsee, there isn't a lot we agree on here.  What I thought we did agree on, was to respect the point of view of the other person.  I do not believe that I have had a narrow mind on the issue, and I could say, right back at you.  I separate the issue from the form of protest.  That is why the form of protest is less isolating and polarizing to me.  While my initial reaction to burning the flag, because of the increase drama as opposed to kneeling to it, would be to recoil and close the avenues to discussion.  It is because I am able to separate the form of protest from the reason for the protest that I think dialogue is important. 

[...]

Read what I said. I am appalled by the narrow minds here....

if you choose to place yourself in that group, thats on you,  By saying what I said, I made it clear there were some who didnt fall into that class.

I made it clear- again, read my words, that you are free to say and believe what you want to. I reserve the right to do the same.

Hunter  GWPB wrote:
[...]
Furthermore, not all vets thinks as you do.  A number have expressed the sentiment that they might not like it, but they would (did) fight for your/my/their right to do it.  [...].

If you are trying to lump me in with folks who dont support free speech, you might want to check before you say things like this. 

From THIS thread, a few pages ago:

rfordphotos wrote:
[...]
I recognize the validity of Kaepernick's protest. Equality is a myth. It is one of the most glaring failures of my generation. We started so well, with the civil rights gains of the early 60's---but we stopped just when we were making real progress.

And I support Kaepernick's right to protest. He has every right to voice his opinions. But, I think he chose the wrong venue, and I am personally offended by his disrespect to a symbol that means something to me and and lots of others.... I feel he could have chosen any of hundreds of other forums , and in truth feel he is hurting his own cause because of the way he chose to protest.

He isnt the first to disrespect things that mean a lot to me, and he wont be the last. That is the nature of a society where you  are free to express your opinions. I may not always enjoy it, but I wouldnt have it any other way.

rfordphotos wrote:
Of course their protest would have been less effective had they done it somewhere else.

In 1968, the raised fist was an unambiguous symbol of Black Power, with a clear meaning to everyone. It was on millions of posters across America. Smith and Carlos made the intent of their protests clear in the press afterwards, unlike Kaepernick who was initially silent with no clear message.

They were amateur athletes, taking advantage of the only world stage they were likely to ever occupy. They knew that a week after the Olympics were over, they would return to relative obscurity.

Kaepernick was a millionaire, who had guaranteed access to the press for at least the full football season, if not beyond. He had already been exposed to, and understood the workings of both print and social media on a national scale.

Of course, in 1968 social media didnt even exist as a way to communicate. In 1968 Smith and Carlos had very, very limited means to make a political statement, I dont believe Kaepernick was limited in in way, and indeed had many other options to choose.

The Olympic Games had long been a world political forum, regardless of the express prohibition of ANY political statements at the Games. Think about the Palestinian actions at the 1972 Olympics, just 4 years later.

1968 was an extremely eventful, violent year. We lost Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy to assassins. We saw the race riots burn down huge swaths of dozens of major US cities. We were arguably more divided as a nation that at any time since the Civil War. Every week literally millions were marching in the street to protest the war in Vietnam.

It is 50 years later, and the world is a different place, and different ways to get things done exist now.

So- I dont really see the two situations as all that similar.

It's 50 years later but they're protesting many of the same things.

Colin Kaepernick started posting on social media about black men being killed by the police in early July 2016, but no one paid attention. Even with his huge social media platform, fame and fortune, no one took any notice of what he had to say.

He sat down during the anthem for the first two preseason games but there was still no media reaction, possibly because he was injured and not in uniform. It was only after the third preseason game in San Francisco (a game that I happened to attend), when a reporter took a photo of the 49ers bench and saw him sitting alone near the coolers that anyone noticed.

https://www.ninersnation.com/2016/8/27/ … nal-anthem

Even then, his protest got little attention and only one reporter, Steve Wyche of nfl.com, contacted him to discuss it. The following week, at the next preseason game, he went from sitting on the bench to taking a knee on the sideline and Eric Reid joined him. The protest then started to spread around the NFL and people began taking notice.

rfordphotos wrote:

I am sorry you are offended.   

I don't have time before class to deal with this.  I will get back you.

Model Mayhem Edu wrote:
It's 50 years later but they're protesting many of the same things.

Colin Kaepernick started posting on social media about black men being killed by the police in early July 2016, but no one paid attention. Even with his huge social media platform, fame and fortune, no one took any notice of what he had to say.

He sat down during the anthem for the first two preseason games but there was still no media reaction, possibly because he was injured and not in uniform. It was only after the third preseason game in San Francisco (a game that I happened to attend), when a reporter took a photo of the 49ers bench and saw him sitting alone near the coolers that anyone noticed.

https://www.ninersnation.com/2016/8/27/ … nal-anthem

Even then, his protest got little attention and only one reporter, Steve Wyche of nfl.com, contacted him to discuss it. The following week, at the next preseason game, he went from sitting on the bench to taking a knee on the sideline and Eric Reid joined him. The protest then started to spread around the NFL and people began taking notice.

His tweets didnt stop police bias overnight, but I think it is wrong to say no one noticed.

No one paid attention? Or the press didnt run his tweets on the front page? His voice blended in with the million other community leaders, politicians and activists who were FINALLY starting to be heard. To say his voice didnt inspire others to action is something you just cant support.

Is change coming fast enough? HELL NO. Not one more innocent man- black white green or whatever should be shot by police, and particularly not because of racial bias. Instantly wouldnt be soon enough.

But that isnt going to happen.

Every mention in the press, every story about another police shooting puts the issue in peoples faces. You would have to be crazy to think things hadnt changed in the past couple years. Good moral people who had simply been too busy with their own lives to look at other's lives have become aware that the picture isnt all rosy, and that there is a HUGE issue that must be resolved.

Good people will not let this go on.

I have to believe that.

Look at the headlines 10 years ago.
Look at them 5 years ago
Look at them last year.

Things are changing. Just at a glacial pace.

Hunter  GWPB wrote:

I am sorry you are offended.   

I don't have time before class to deal with this.  I will get back you.

To be clear, no one on these forums has offended me.

Some forms of protest offend me, but words or  ideas in the course of a discussion like this. no.

If I have offended anyone here, please accept my apology, and understand that I only intended to have a discussion, and never intended to offend anyone.

rfordphotos wrote:
His tweets didnt stop police bias overnight, but I think it is wrong to say no one noticed.

No one paid attention? Or the press didnt run his tweets on the front page? His voice blended in with the million other community leaders, politicians and activists who were FINALLY starting to be heard. To say his voice didnt inspire others to action is something you just cant support.

I feel like you're mixing broad and narrow discussion points.

The media and most of the country paid no attention to Colin Kaepernick's political views until they led to the NFL player protests. That's clear from the timeline of events.

He most certainly did inspire others to action, especially in the NFL, but that came after he protested the national anthem. The point I'm trying to make is that everyone saying he should have protested in another way ignores that it simply wouldn't have had the same impact. You don't even need to imagine a counterfactual because the timeline shows his initial attempts were ignored. If the goal is to raise awareness it makes sense to take action that will have the most impact.

Model Mayhem Edu wrote:
I feel like you're mixing broad and narrow discussion points.

The media and most of the country paid no attention to Colin Kaepernick's political views until they led to the NFL player protests. That's clear from the timeline of events.

He most certainly did inspire others to action, especially in the NFL, but that came after he protested the national anthem. The point I'm trying to make is that everyone saying he should have protested in another way ignores that it simply wouldn't have had the same impact. You don't even need to imagine a counterfactual because the timeline shows his initial attempts were ignored. If the goal is to raise awareness it makes sense to take action that will have the most impact.

And I am trying to say that even after the media took notice, it wasnt because of his position on police racial bias, it was because of the controversy his actions sparked about a completely unrelated issue, the flag and respect/disrespect.

I would be willing to bet you could ask the avg white NFL fan what Colin Kaepernick's protest was about, and they would tell you he doesnt like the flag. That couldnt be more wrong, couldnt be farther from what he was trying to say, but perception is a bitch. I dont think he reached the people who needed to hear his message the most. Pretty sure the black fans already knew.....

If his protest only gained notice for all the wrong reasons, was it any more effective than his tweets? Or less?

I have made it clear I think his initial intentions were honorable. And I am not blaming him for the press jumping on the disrespect  aspect of it. I do think he could have found a better way to protest in the first place, and after the fact, I think he could have done a lot more to change the direction it took.

rfordphotos wrote:
To be clear, no one on these forums has offended me.

Some forms of protest offend me, but words or ideas in the course of a discussion like this. no.

If I have offended anyone here, please accept my apology, and understand that I only intended to have a discussion, and never intended to offend anyone.

-
Nor am I trying to offend.

I just went back and read every post you have made in this thread.  I admit, sometimes the voices run together.  You are usually a reasonable guy and are being so in this thread.  My perception was that you had constantly been referring to how offended you are by the protest because of the method, and my perception was that it overrode what you had said to support free speech.  After re-reading every post, you hadn't made that statement as often as I was perceiving you to have done so. 

(You is more of a vague concept than personal in the following.)

However, i am still befuddled.  A person offended by the assault on the flag but still in favor of free speech, excluding disrespecting the flag, grants his right to protest, but consistently indicates that his method is disenfranchising because it is offensive to the military men and women of the country.  He/they should have found a better way.  But this is where we are at.  How many of us wish we could have found a better way at something in our lives?  We can't go back and restart the discussion.  Once you are pregnant, the reality is, you are pregnant.  It isn't about the poor decision that got you pregnant.  Once you are pregnant, it is about what are you going to do and how are you going to do it.  Even if CK attempted to do something different, he would still be remembered for the ball he started rolling.  A large segment of the population would ignore any possibility of joining the discussion because he didn't stand.  Nothing else will ever matter.  The "offense" is more important than the problem.  Because some people just don't live with the problem.  Just as people who are against abortion are also often against the social programs to help raise that child out of poverty, because it is more important to make a judgement against a person for getting pregnant.  Hell with the kid, as long as it is born.

Look at some of things said in this thread, and fortunately, ignored by the participants.  Is it really laughable that some people get shot for holding a cell phone?  Is it really not important that there is significant police brutality because only a few unarmed black men are killed each year- and because that is the only manifestation of the problem?  Is it really important that a cop is more likely to be killed by a black man than a black man to be killed by a cop because of population comparisons- and does that justify killing black men or using excessive techniques?  Cooking the problem down to one statistic while ignoring the daily grind is absurd.  Not that you personally are doing that.  But sometimes, there comes a point where we, as reasonable people, need to stop fretting about the guy that got into our collective faces, and discuss the problem calmly and rationally, which can include dialogue about not getting in our face.

I did this job a couple of years ago.  The customer trained under my brother, Archer.  I had never met the customer before.  We got along fine.  Seemed like a nice guy.   A black guy.  The job was little and done quickly.  A few months later, my employee had been telling me about sitting with this customer at various little league and school events.  Both their kids went to the same school.  Then one day at Home Depot, there was this little choke point in the parking lot and the guy was having a hard time manipulating a large truck and trailer in a small space.  My employee saw him, recognized him, rolled down his window to say hi, and the guy he had gotten to know at all these events cursed him and threatened to kill him.  My employee was distraught about it.  He didn't call the cops.  Eventually, they ran into each other at a place where they could talk.  My former customer was working the polls where my employee votes.  My employee asked him about it and recollected the event back to him.  Turns out, the guy's brother had died just before that and he was a bit of a wreck.  That day in the parking lot wasn't the only thing he apologized to various people about due to his actions in his time of strife. They are now cool.  Point is, the altercation was offensive.  Very offensive.  But my employee was wise enough to let the altercation go and to talk about their problem.  Ultimately, both of them were served in a positive way.

So, maybe a veteran should tell KC or anyone else, that they are pissed about disrespecting the flag and then let it go.  Because I can assure anyone reading this, that those guys have a reason to be pissed too.  Justifiably so.  I posted a link to a story about an Native Alaskan woman.  It may have seemed off topic.  It wasn't off topic because the story illustrated the very real damage that people endure today because of very bad decisions and racist policies that happened long ago.  Pile up a few hundred years of slavery, the fugitive slave act, Jim Crow, lynchings, the KKK, continued abuses by the politicians to deprive people of equal representation, treatment as second class citizens, automatic distrust and police interrogations because they are black, brown, or otherwise not white enough- and tell me that any black man- born rich, or who struggled for years to develop skills that make him rich for a time, or a poor guy, hasn't experienced a multitude of wtf moments in a free country.  I know they were experiencing things that I have not- because when I taught my son, Trapper, to drive, it never even occurred to me that he need a lesson in how to talk to cops, to keep his hands in plain view on the steering wheel, to never make a sudden move, even with my problem with authority! 

When I lived in Florida, “good” God fearing white church people would tell me how the Bible dictated that blacks should be treated as lesser beings because they are the descendants of Ham.  Noah cursed Ham and his descendants because Noah got drunk and played around naked.  Then blamed Ham for seeing the old nudest without clothes?  Does that sound like Godly justice?  Furthermore, that is Old Testament stuff.  A Christian ought to be able to tell you that Christ came to fulfill the promises and prophecies of the Old Testament, and that He died to pay for our sins.  He died to pay for our sins unless you are descendant of Ham, in which case you are still cursed and ^&$* you then?   This is what I have seen.  This is what I still see.  People that don't believe that racism is ingrained in our society, ain't walking around with their eyes open.  Then: When do the offenses that the repressed people have seen, equal the offense of a few representatives, regardless of their net worth, against a SYMBOL of the country, so that we can talk?

When is it time to stop being mired in the stand off, in order to get to the problem?

Hunter  GWPB wrote:
[[...]
When is it time to stop being mired in the stand off, in order to get to the problem?

Nice post.

My answer to your last question?

Now. No, check that, 50 years ago.

But I cant change that bit of history either.

So, Hunter I am doing the same thing I assume you are doing. I am driving the Police Commission locally half crazy with demands for new body cams, new protocols about using those cams, and insisting that we double then double again the de-escalation training given to all officers. I write to my local and state elected officials, hoping to get funding for better training for cops, better and more community outreach programs, after school programs.

I used to write to my federal reps, but to be honest, they havent given a hoot about California since they got a taste of national power...

rfordphotos wrote:

Nice post.

My answer to your last question?

Now. No, check that, 50 years ago.

But I cant change that bit of history either.

So, Hunter I am doing the same thing I assume you are doing. I am driving the Police Commission locally half crazy with demands for new body cams, new protocols about using those cams, and insisting that we double then double again the de-escalation training given to all officers. I write to my local and state elected officials, hoping to get funding for better training for cops, better and more community outreach programs, after school programs.

I used to write to my federal reps, but to be honest, they havent given a hoot about California since they got a taste of national power...

Cool 

rfordphotos wrote:
And I am trying to say that even after the media took notice, it wasnt because of his position on police racial bias, it was because of the controversy his actions sparked about a completely unrelated issue, the flag and respect/disrespect.

I would be willing to bet you could ask the avg white NFL fan what Colin Kaepernick's protest was about, and they would tell you he doesnt like the flag. That couldnt be more wrong, couldnt be farther from what he was trying to say, but perception is a bitch. I dont think he reached the people who needed to hear his message the most. Pretty sure the black fans already knew.....

If his protest only gained notice for all the wrong reasons, was it any more effective than his tweets? Or less?

I have made it clear I think his initial intentions were honorable. And I am not blaming him for the press jumping on the disrespect  aspect of it. I do think he could have found a better way to protest in the first place, and after the fact, I think he could have done a lot more to change the direction it took.

I think we have very different takes on the outcome. I believe his protest was far more effective than his tweets. Yes, the issues he was protesting got obscured in the ensuing debate but that was primarily because certain elements of the media, politicians, etc. wanted to muddy the waters and change the topic of conversation. In some ways that strengthens Kaepernick's argument as he's protesting racial injustice and was met with the forces of institutional racism.

Model Mayhem Edu wrote:
I think we have very different takes on the outcome. I believe his protest was far more effective than his tweets. Yes, the issues he was protesting got obscured in the ensuing debate but that was primarily because certain elements of the media, politicians, etc. wanted to muddy the waters and change the topic of conversation. In some ways that strengthens Kaepernick's argument as he's protesting racial injustice and was met with the forces of institutional racism.

He choose to protest during the National anthem. That in itself is very polarizing.

“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses Black people and people of color." I do not understand how anyone can say it was not about the flag?

Also, not sure that his protest made on bit of difference in addressing the issues he is protesting...

Model Mayhem Edu wrote:
I think we have very different takes on the outcome. I believe his protest was far more effective than his tweets. Yes, the issues he was protesting got obscured in the ensuing debate but that was primarily because certain elements of the media, politicians, etc. wanted to muddy the waters and change the topic of conversation. In some ways that strengthens Kaepernick's argument as he's protesting racial injustice and was met with the forces of institutional racism.

Yes, I guess we do. Here we are, more than a year after he began his protest.

What are we discussing? What headlines prompted this thread? Systemic Racial Bias? Or NFL rules governing player behavior during the national anthem? Is the nation discussing Kaepernick's issue, or his actions?

You insist his tweets werent effective. I wonder how you have come to that conclusion?  Why was his voice, with his loyal fans following him, reading his words, retweeting them, not effective?  Social media is credited with changing the outcome of the last election- surely the voice of a popular sports figure was heard among his fans- and lots of them no doubt took those words to heart. To my knowledge- his posts didnt offend anyone... so no negative baggage attached to the issue.

Instead of discussing solutions to systemic racial bias, Americans are discussing whether it is Kaepernick's playing or politics that keep him off the field. An important discussion to be sure, but certainly not the one he intended.

As to why the issues he was protesting got obscured- well, apparently you feel it was a conspiracy to silence him- I cant prove you wrong- And I believe it was a reaction to the --form-- of his protest. Chicken or the egg. You cant prove that wrong either.

So yeah, we dont see things the same. I wish we were not having this discussion at all. I wish we were talking about the bad old days when inequality and racial bias were the norm, and how great things are since people overcame that ignorance.

Model Mayhem Edu wrote:
[...]
In some ways that strengthens Kaepernick's argument as he's protesting racial injustice and was met with the forces of institutional racism.

As I said above- a separate- but important discussion to have.

Without question racism entered into the response. To what degree, I cant say. Too large a degree, regardless.

But- a large percentage of people only saw the disrespect for a time honored tradition- you stood for the national anthem. Everything he tried to say after that was lost in that one action.

Easy to say people should have seen past that- that they should look more deeply into issues before they judge.

That certainly would make things better in this world. Wont hold my breath though. Critical thinking would solve about 75% of the world's problems. But we as a species arent good at that yet. We can hope.

So I see validity in his statement.  Unquestionably he met with blind, ignorant racism. He also met with a lot of people's core beliefs that the symbol of the flag, the nation, was something worthy of respect, even with all our problems.

I believe he is out of the league for purely commercial reasons- as I have said---his considerable talent, his specific skill set and style were just not a good enough match to overcome the negative impact he had on the advertisers and the ticket sales. A simple economic bottom line decision.

rfordphotos wrote:
But- a large percentage of people only saw the disrespect for a time honored tradition- you stood for the national anthem. Everything he tried to say after that was lost in that one action.

Easy to say people should have seen past that- that they should look more deeply into issues before they judge.  ...

I admit that I am struggling with this aspect of this discussion.  I became more aware of global issues around the same time as the Vietnam War.  In my day, I saw lots of provocative acts meant to show disrespect for the flag:  I've seen the flag burned; I've seen the flag thrown on the ground & stomped on, I've seen the flag flown upside down, I've seen the flag modified to make a political statement, I've seen the flag used to wipe up sweat or other more noxious spills, I've seen the flag ripped to shreds, and so forth.

On the other hand, kneeling is (in all other contexts that I can think of) a sign of respect.  One kneels in church, one kneels to royalty, and people take a knee when they propose marriage.

So, okay, I get it -- people want to see kneeling during the anthem as a sign of disrespect, and they are entitled to their opinion, but haven't we seen stuff a big lot worse?  Isn't this specific act peaceful & non-violent?  Couldn't it have been a lot worse, given past history of flag protests?

All of which ignores the concerns that were are at the heart of these protests, like the story I reported on before, where a Florida black man's life was determined to be worth only $4.00.  So, why is a peaceful protest against the flag more important than the problem treatment of minorities in this country?

Looknsee Photography wrote:
Jury awards $4 to family of black man killed by sheriff’s deputies in Fla.

If I was part of this family, I might find this offensive & insulting.  In his own garage + loud music complaint + black = dead.

Actually, they awarded $.04

Looknsee Photography wrote:
Jury awards $4 to family of black man killed by sheriff’s deputies in Fla.

If I was part of this family, I might find this offensive & insulting.  In his own garage + loud music complaint + black = dead.

You forgot to add:  "and intoxicated and had a gun."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/30/us/g … orida.html

This is the problem when you only see what you want to see.

Tony From Syracuse wrote:
I think alot of people dislike when we see african americans protest because most of us who live here actually think this is a great country and for the most part just gosh darnnit dont seem to have the experiences african americans have with the police.

someone brought up a thread about karma a few days ago. I think in general, young black youth are responsible for most of their own problems. and when we are told they are targeted by the police for their skin color, I think alot of us just think its more along the lines of how they act and the skin color thing is just the excuse to get back at the police.  its actually kinda highschool. you know, I'm failing because the teacher hates me.

Tony,

As a fat old white man, my knee jerk reaction was always---"why didnt the kid just stop, let the cops arrest him, and deal with it in court?" After all the cops are the good guys right?

Except he grew up in a different reality than I did. In many instances, he was shown that the cops were not the good guys. He saw the unfair profiling. He heard the racial slurs when spoken to. He was brought up on stories of abuse, not support by the police.

He saw that the courts worked "best" if you had the money for a high powered attorney. Justice was a bit fluid.

So- yeah. Running from the cops is a poor choice. Cops ultimately have longer legs. But I dont find it a mystery any more why these kids do what they do.

Until we stop teaching our kids to be bigots though our own actions, this will go on. White people, black people, brown people.... these "communities" need to end bigotry at home. when they do, it will die in public institutions.