Taking a knee. Part Three

Colin Kaepernick took a knee to protest racial injustice. His protest drew complaints.

       "You disgrace the entire nation. The taxpaying citizens of this country subsidize your plush work environments, yet you choose to use those venues to openly offend those very citizens."

          From letter of complaint to the NFL

This blog asked readers: Was that complaint letter the voice of a racist?

Sports Illustrated

For two days this blog has examined an angry letter written to the NFL and its employees. The letter's author was sharply critical of Colin Kaepernick and others for their silent protest against racial injustice during playing of the National Anthem. The letter said the players have "an over-inflated view of themselves. "You disgrace the entire nation when you 'take a knee.' You are nothing but overpaid entertainers." 

Read the entire letter in the blog post two days ago, June 22. 

Thad Guyer said the letter-writer was obviously and flagrantly racist. In yesterday's post Michael Trigoboff responded that a racist animus was indeterminate, and in any case Kaepernick's protest offended his own sense of respect for our national symbols, and that Kaepernick represented a movement characterized by self righteous and censorious over-reach on political correctness.

Today's post presents three of the many comments this blog received. The original subject of the protest--racial injustice--has gotten lost. The dispute is over the protest itself.

One view: Kaepernick is an American citizen and he has a right to protest

John Coster

John Coster began as an electrician, which career led to managing construction on billion dollar projects for Microsoft, Google, Skandia and others. He takes time to go on Christian missionary projects to some of the world's most troubled places. He brings a progressive and evangelical Christian orientation to issues of public concern.  He wrote:

    "I agree with Guyer's assessment but rather than just throw water on the grease fire, I'd like to ask the writer some questions: 

     1. Exactly what does the flag stand for if not the freedom of expression, including yours?

     2. Do you agree that the premise of The Declaration of Independence that an aggrieved people have the right to dissent and even replace a government that isn't working for them? Is there any context where that should not be expressed or exercised? 

     3. What is exactly wrong with using a public platform to express your beliefs or exert influence? The NFL is a business that makes money from its brand. Trump got elected President based on nothing but his inflated TV brand and being able to stoke outrage. He's now using his presidential platform to stoke outrage of a different kind. The NFL at first caved into Trump's bullying but has figured out that more of their tribe (and earnings) are aligned with racial justice than the mythical nostalgia of white America. If you don't like the brand-then you're free to not shop there. What does the NFL actually owe you?

   

     4. I thought it was striking that an African-American GI was used as your example of a "real hero". What do you say to the data that show that this "hero" is many times more likely to be arrested and incarcerated JUST because he is black? Further, what do you personally propose to do about this kind of systemic injustice? Or do you agree that's all okay so long as nobody acts disrespectfully to the symbol for which he fought and was disfigured. 

     Oh, it's all so simple if you don't bother to think about it."

A second view: It's about social class, snobbery, and a covert form of racism.

Herb Rothschild

Herb Rothschild is a retired professor and current peace activist and writes a weekly column for the Ashland Daily Tidings.

     "What I was struck by in the physician's letter is how demeaning it is. It begins with a false analogy--that a football player's expressing a political opinion is parallel to a layperson's giving a medical diagnosis. This is itself tell-tale, because it suggests that football players aren't citizens, all of whom have both the standing and even the obligation to speak out on critical public topics. Instead, they are mere entertainers of an audience of citizens like the author of the letter, who doesn't hesitate to express his political opinions. 

     The contempt becomes increasingly explicit as the letter continues. This snobbery of a physician toward a football player is sufficiently offensive to condemn the letter for gross prejudice. What you asked me, however, is whether it is racist. Thad Guyer sees it as overtly racist and condemns it in intemperate language. I see it as covertly racist, the kind that the author is blind to. He probably thinks that his extolling the sacrifice of black soldiers frees him of bias. But it is almost certain that he was less hesitant to write so contemptuously of NFL players because the majority of them are black and the players who took a knee, beginning with Kaepernick, were black. 

     When I was growing up in the pre-Civil Rights South, blacks weren't entitled to voice political opinions. They were servants. I think that is the true analogy underlying this letter. but one to which its author is oblivious."

Kaepernick really does offend people. And so does leftist bullying when they condemn people for feeling that offense. 

Gary Shade, smokejumper and author

Gary Shade is a semi-retired trucker. He graduated from Penn State Forestry during the Vietnam era, was a commissioned US Army officer, then smokejumper, then investment advisor. He write about his adventures, including a book on life as a long haul trucker--The Hotshot Chronicles.

    "Regarding the NFL letter. Guyer's "racist author" represents tens of millions of Americans who hold similar views along with flag kneeling which desecrates the memory and sacrifices of those who served their country and the world. How does name calling help folks dialogue and communicate, in an adult manner, regarding racism and patriotism. As an intellectual leftist bully, his displays of righteous indignation are discouraging. Thad's white male anger is unbecoming. It may work for a job on the Supreme Court. But, can we leave behind anger's attempt to make the other feel guilt? His critique of others is more about him, and what we need to do to make him feel better.

Lawyers really suck when it comes to reconciliation, collaboration, and empathy. They are taught to aggressively pursue win-lose confrontations. And, in order to successfully plead the victim, they feel compelled to aggrandize the victimizer.

We are all judgmental about most things in our cause and effect world. All day long, we are each making prejudicial judgments that shapes our perception of people of different shapes, sizes, colors, sex, and beliefs. I don't know who is more irritating, a pugnacious anti-racist or a quiet ignorant racist? They both make my head hurt.

Me thinketh Thad doth protest too much"