Colin Kaepernick’s refusal to stand for the national anthem is justified. Yes or No? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14714638
San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s refusal to stand for the national anthem before games as a protest against recent high-profile incidents of police brutality and racial injustice have been met with criticism and protests, but is an important step for a league where professional athletes rarely speak out on such issues.

Kaepernick was noticed sitting down during the playing of “The Star Spangled Banner” in a preseason game Friday. When asked by a reporter about his actions, he said:

I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.
The NFL does not require its athletes stand for the national anthem, and, indeed, the 49ers said it was within Kaepernick’s right to not participate. But some coaches say they expect members of their team to stand, regardless of their personal feelings. It’s a delicate line that Rex Ryan, the Buffalo Bills head coach, addressed in a Sunday news conference:

Anytime I talk to my team about that, if there’s personal beliefs or whatever that keep you from doing it, I understand. But at the same time, you know, you’ve got to look at the gifts that we have, the opportunity that we have to play a great game is through the men and women that serve our country. I think that’s an opportunity right there just to show respect, and I think that’s why when you see our team, every one of us are on that line and that’s kind of our way of giving thanks.
Reaction to Kaepernick’s actions were largely negative and included people burning his jerseys. Pro athletes in other leagues have expressed solidarity with the Black Lives Matters movement. NBA stars famously protested the killings of unarmed black men by white officers, as did their counterparts in the WNBA; even Michael Jordan, who was notoriously taciturn about politics during his playing days, has weighed in. But this is an important moment for professional football: one of the league’s stars is speaking out on social-justice issues, something that is rare in the NFL.


Earlier this month, Aaron Rodgers, the Green Bay Packers quarterback, said more athletes should speak out on critical issues. But stopping them is the NFL’s culture, he said. He told ESPN:

I think some guys in the NFL are probably worried about repercussions on speaking their mind from the league … I think if more guys maybe did in our league, it would create a domino effect possibly.
But could more athletes join Kaepernick’s protest?

Philadelphia Eagles rookie linebacker Myke Tavarres said Monday he plans to sit during the national anthem in a preseason game later this week. Racial injustice is too important to ignore, he told ESPN.

We’ve got an issue in this country in this day and age, and I feel like somebody needs to step up and we all need to step up. We’ve got that right. There’s just a lot going on that people don’t want to talk about, and I feel like us as athletes, we’re looked at as role models.
This is a risky move by Tavarres, who is fighting for one of the limited spots of the team. But as he put to ESPN, he’s “got nothing to lose,” since he hasn’t signed any major contract or endorsement deal. Kaepernick, on the other hand, has a six-year, $114 million contract. What is at stake, Tavarres says, is his pride as a black man.

While Tavarres is the only football player to come out and join Kaepernick in protest, more athletes could join.

Athletes have the ability to bring important issues to the national stage. Kaepernick’s actions have even brought on a debate surrounding “The Star Spangled Banner,” as well, with several authors bringing up the song’s ties to slavery. It shows how powerful a moment it is when professional athletes speak up and take political stands.


http://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive ... st/497945/
#14714653
I rarely stand, only when it happens to be convenient or something. And if I do, I never put my hand over my heart or any of that nonsense.

So sure, whatever.

But let's be honest about what his motivations probably are. His narrative for being Santa Clara's golden boy was always that people from the Northwest were so mean to his little feelings. This is how he made money, by exploiting this:



Incidentally, this was strictly a commercial invention for his brand. When push came to shove, they'd always remind everyone that the Seahawks are the Davids in this Goliath story:

Image

He'd been sucking more and more each year, and last year Santa Clara had a notorious collapse, the likes of which has rarely been seen before.

He sucked, really bad, so bad that they started benching him and not letting him play.

Cut to this season getting ready to start and he begins some big controversy that reinforces his (already not accurate version of reality) brand.

Did he give a shit about minorities before this? Not a peep. Only when his bank account was low and star was fading did he decide to make a stand that coincidently reinforced his tarnished brand.

He sucks as a quarterback, his team sucks, but he needs that advertising so he's falling back on his initial paycheck—to make himself look like he's a martyr.
#14714656
CONTROVERSY CONTINUES: At a post game news conference, Colin Kaepernick wore a T-shirt with former Cuban Leader Fidel Castro and Malcolm X. The shirt – which had photographs of their meeting in 1960 – read: "Like Minds Think Alike."


The Americans are up in arms over Kaepernick actions. Him wearing socks with pigs on them has stuck a nerve as well. lol

Image

Edit
The US National Anthem, The Star Spangled Banner consists of not one verse, the one that is sung, but four verses. The third verse concerns the killing of slaves. lol


STAR SPANGLED BANNER

O! say can you see, by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming,
Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming?
And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there;
O! say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

On the shore dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected now shines in the stream:
'Tis the star-spangled banner, O! long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,
A home and a country, should leave us no more?
Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:

And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave,
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

O! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation.
Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the Heav'n rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation!
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: 'In God is our trust.'
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
#14714752
It is totally justified. It's called freedom of expression. If you don't believe that, then you don't believe in the Constitution(the First Amendment), and just want to deny people of their rights because of your own opinion.

You wanting to deny him the ability to do this, shows you aren't as good an American, as you think you are, and far less patriotic than you pretend to be.
#14714753
LOL @The Immortal Goon is actually trolling hella hard. Santa Clara indeed. Go Hawks!

I would say this is a non-story. He's not even a relevant person, it's just gaining traction because the media loves talking shit. Seems that veterans don't care at all. The only people that seem to care are all faux-patriots.
#14714756
It might be disrespectful, but it's legal and the people who founded the USA would say it's perfectly fine for this person to do this.

The people worth respecting are long dead, in the US, anyways. What's left?
#14714764
Your idea of the right thing is probably different from what other people consider the right thing.

Patriotism doesn't need to be visible and on display to exist. I think a lot of people forget that. His refusal to stand for the national anthem is indeed justified by the state of the nation, as it exists, now.
Last edited by Godstud on 02 Sep 2016 09:03, edited 1 time in total.
#14714765
Donald wrote:In my experience this kind of thing is disrespectful to society's elders, who still retain memories of the sacrifices that their generation made for the future.

Society's elders fought in world wars, society's elders created world wars. At the end of the day the past is the past. The song has racist connotations anyway. This thread is not the first one that I have seen that, but it's more convenient for people to deify a series of notes and phonemes (which are just mathematical values really) than to try to understand his message, which is an inconvenient truth for white people.
#14714768
I can remember the indignation when Mohamed Ali refused to fight in the Vietnam War. He was called a traitor and a coward as is Kaepernick of today.
In 1966, two years after winning the heavyweight title, Ali further antagonized the white establishment in the U.S. by refusing to be conscripted into the U.S. military, citing his religious beliefs and opposition to American involvement in the Vietnam War. He was eventually arrested, found guilty of draft evasion charges and stripped of his boxing titles. He successfully appealed in the U.S. Supreme Court, which overturned his conviction in 1971, by which time he had not fought for nearly four years—losing a period of peak performance as an athlete. Ali's actions as a conscientious objector to the war made him an icon for the larger counterculture generation.

Wikipedia

edit
And two years later at the Olympic Games in Mexico.

The 1968 Olympics Black Power salute was a political demonstration conducted by African-American athletes Tommie Smith and John Carlos during their medal ceremony at the 1968 Summer Olympics in the Olympic Stadium in Mexico City. After having won gold and bronze medals, respectively, in the 200 meter running event, they turned on the podium to face their flags, and to hear the American national anthem, "The Star-Spangled Banner". Each athlete raised a black-gloved fist, and kept them raised until the anthem had finished. In addition, Smith, Carlos, and Australian silver medalist Peter Norman all wore human rights badges on their jackets. In his autobiography, Silent Gesture, Smith stated that the gesture was not a "Black Power" salute, but a "human rights salute". The event is regarded as one of the most overtly political statements in the history of the modern Olympic Games.

Wikipedia
#14714789
LV-GUCCI-PRADA-FLEX wrote:Society's elders fought in world wars, society's elders created world wars. At the end of the day the past is the past. The song has racist connotations anyway. This thread is not the first one that I have seen that, but it's more convenient for people to deify a series of notes and phonemes (which are just mathematical values really) than to try to understand his message, which is an inconvenient truth for white people.


His message is unfortunately predicated on a subversive black nationalism that does nothing to alleviate the continued polarization of America. White people are never going to "see the light" in the way that critical race theorists want them to. It is a totally failed project that has fomented resentment on both sides.
#14714799
Decky wrote:Seems fair. The US is a white supremacist nation. Why would any black person be pathetic enough to stand for the US anthem?
America was historically a White supremacist nation, but it was also a Native American supremacist nation. Native Americans could own Black slaves, but as far as I'm aware Whites and Blacks could not own Native American slaves.

The racial superiority of Native Americans over Black people is deeply entrenched in American and Canadian culture, and is supported by Conservatives, Liberals and Marxists. So far example the whole fuss about the Washington Redskin, a completely fictitious act of racism while ignoring the blatant racism of the national anthem. The left along with most Cuckservatives support Blut und Boden racist nationalism for the native Americans, while completely denying it for say the Germans.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8

Another resource of degenerates who want to watch […]

There are many ways to approach a construction si[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

I disagree with this, but I also don't think &quo[…]

The actual argument (that the definition is being[…]