"The attack on the protest and on Kaepernick is a continuation of [Trump's] ever-present quest to divide the nation as well as undermine the American democracy." -- Miles De Rosa
On labor day, Colin Kaepernick tweeted a Nike ad that had been in the works for months. The ad (above) pictured his face in black and white with the text “Believe In Something. Even If It Means Sacrificing Everything,” with Nike slogan and logo at the bottom. The following week ushered in a flurry of responses. Trump voiced his opinions via twitter, a grassroots Boycott Nike campaign came into being, and social media platforms were flooded with videos of people cutting the swoosh from their socks and burning their shoes. Still, Nike stock and sales skyrocketed. And then on Thursday, during the season opening Eagles-Falcons game, NBC aired Nike’s new ad, voiced by and featuring Colin Kaepernick.
This flurry of reactions, from people on both sides of the issue, delivers a lot to unpack. First off, how does sports, something traditionally unifying, turn into something so politically divisive? And, secondly, when did protest become un American? This boycott, the latest shot fired in Kaepernick’s war, continues to pound home what we have already learned about Trump’s America and its relationship to our democracy.
The first protest of the flag in American sports was carried out by Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf (right) during the 1995-96 NBA season. Instead of standing for the anthem, Abdul-Rauf either continued to warm-up or stayed in the locker room. It was a non-issue until a reporter asked him about it and he said that he viewed the American flag as a racist symbol and regarded supporting the anthem as being in conflict with his Muslim faith. He was promptly suspended and fined by the NBA. After he had served his suspension and with the support of the players union he worked out a deal that allowed him to stand and pray during the anthem as opposed to saluting it. He was out of the league two years later, in a suspected occurence of blackballing. Much like Kaepernick, statistically speaking, he should still have had a job. In his last season as a starter in the NBA he averaged nineteen points, nearly seven assists, and one steal, while shooting 43% from the field and 39% from three. His player efficiency rating, a stat used to boil a players production down to one number, was 18.6. League average is 15. In short, he was a good bordering great NBA point guard at the time.
Despite this—and the other numerous instances of sports protest in America—Kaepernick's war is the first instance of the protest starting a bipartisan political battle, largely in part to President Trump’s instigative tweets. After the ad campaign launched, Mr. Trump tweeted “Wow, NFL first game ratings are way down over an already really bad last year comparison. Viewership declined 13%, the lowest in over a decade. If the players stood proudly for our Flag and Anthem, and it is all shown on broadcast, maybe ratings could come back? Otherwise worse!” It is important to note that most analysts believe that the drop is actually due to an overall dip in T.V. viewership.
This statement, along with his previous tweets the year prior in which he referred to kneeling players as ‘sons of bitches,’ continued the pattern of Trump’s divisive leadership. Videos spread like wildfire over social media of people chastising Nike for supporting the athlete and burning their products. While those on the other side of the issue came storming to Kaepernick’s and even Nike’s defense.
These statements also hint to why this issue has become so divisive in the first place. Sports has, for the most part, throughout history been a place where Americans could come together and set aside political differences. But now, without our country both politically and physically divided, there is no common ground, quite literally. According to Johnathon Haidt, a social psychologist from the University of Virginia, residential homogeneity is a major contributor to political polarization. People share very little space with their opposing party. Places that are liberal are becoming more liberal and places that are conservative are becoming more conservative. This leaves people with no place to physically come together with the other side.
This flurry of reactions, from people on both sides of the issue, delivers a lot to unpack. First off, how does sports, something traditionally unifying, turn into something so politically divisive? And, secondly, when did protest become un American? This boycott, the latest shot fired in Kaepernick’s war, continues to pound home what we have already learned about Trump’s America and its relationship to our democracy.
The first protest of the flag in American sports was carried out by Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf (right) during the 1995-96 NBA season. Instead of standing for the anthem, Abdul-Rauf either continued to warm-up or stayed in the locker room. It was a non-issue until a reporter asked him about it and he said that he viewed the American flag as a racist symbol and regarded supporting the anthem as being in conflict with his Muslim faith. He was promptly suspended and fined by the NBA. After he had served his suspension and with the support of the players union he worked out a deal that allowed him to stand and pray during the anthem as opposed to saluting it. He was out of the league two years later, in a suspected occurence of blackballing. Much like Kaepernick, statistically speaking, he should still have had a job. In his last season as a starter in the NBA he averaged nineteen points, nearly seven assists, and one steal, while shooting 43% from the field and 39% from three. His player efficiency rating, a stat used to boil a players production down to one number, was 18.6. League average is 15. In short, he was a good bordering great NBA point guard at the time.
Despite this—and the other numerous instances of sports protest in America—Kaepernick's war is the first instance of the protest starting a bipartisan political battle, largely in part to President Trump’s instigative tweets. After the ad campaign launched, Mr. Trump tweeted “Wow, NFL first game ratings are way down over an already really bad last year comparison. Viewership declined 13%, the lowest in over a decade. If the players stood proudly for our Flag and Anthem, and it is all shown on broadcast, maybe ratings could come back? Otherwise worse!” It is important to note that most analysts believe that the drop is actually due to an overall dip in T.V. viewership.
This statement, along with his previous tweets the year prior in which he referred to kneeling players as ‘sons of bitches,’ continued the pattern of Trump’s divisive leadership. Videos spread like wildfire over social media of people chastising Nike for supporting the athlete and burning their products. While those on the other side of the issue came storming to Kaepernick’s and even Nike’s defense.
These statements also hint to why this issue has become so divisive in the first place. Sports has, for the most part, throughout history been a place where Americans could come together and set aside political differences. But now, without our country both politically and physically divided, there is no common ground, quite literally. According to Johnathon Haidt, a social psychologist from the University of Virginia, residential homogeneity is a major contributor to political polarization. People share very little space with their opposing party. Places that are liberal are becoming more liberal and places that are conservative are becoming more conservative. This leaves people with no place to physically come together with the other side.
The attack on these protests by the president (left) is not simply about his patriotism, or his racism (though Kaepernick is not the only black athlete the president has attacked). The attack on the protest and on Kaepernick is a continuation of his ever-present quest to divide the nation as well as undermine the American democracy.
According to Thomas B. Edsall, a political writer for the New York Times, “Trump has gravely damaged the premises and procedures that undergird American democracy.” For example, A former aid comes out against him, and he calls her a dog and his office runs a smear campaign. The press runs a mass story criticizing President Trump or exposing a story that could hurt him, like the Russia investigation, and he attacks the free press. And when an athlete uses their platform to protests and get attention for an issue that they care about, he demands that they be suspended and encourages people to stop watching the NFL.
The danger in Trump's attack on the first amendment is that it not only delegitimizes each individual element of it (freedom of speech, freedom of press, and freedom to assemble), it delegitimizes the American democracy itself.
According to Voice of America, a government funded broadcast news source that serves as the official institution for non-military broadcasting, “Arguably, the First Amendment is also the most important to the maintenance of a democratic government.” A democracy needs these three pillars to run effectively. Freedom of speech allows for a free-flowing exchange and expansion of ideas. Freedom of the press allows the people to know what their leaders accountable to and helps keep them accountable. Freedom to assemble helps the minority escape the tyranny of the majority.
And freedom of speech, especially the freedom to speak out against American leaders and systems, was never meant to be un American. It is the foundation from which American democracy was built. But when something is anti-Trump, Mr. Trump warps it to make it seem like it is anti-American, and he has his supporters convinced. His approval rating holds steady at between 38-45%.
The success of the Colin Kaepernick ad, or the continuing protests in the NFL, or the NFL’s ratings, is besides the point. The remaining question is, will the American people allow Trump to fully undermine their democracy? And what will Americans do to get back on track?
According to Thomas B. Edsall, a political writer for the New York Times, “Trump has gravely damaged the premises and procedures that undergird American democracy.” For example, A former aid comes out against him, and he calls her a dog and his office runs a smear campaign. The press runs a mass story criticizing President Trump or exposing a story that could hurt him, like the Russia investigation, and he attacks the free press. And when an athlete uses their platform to protests and get attention for an issue that they care about, he demands that they be suspended and encourages people to stop watching the NFL.
The danger in Trump's attack on the first amendment is that it not only delegitimizes each individual element of it (freedom of speech, freedom of press, and freedom to assemble), it delegitimizes the American democracy itself.
According to Voice of America, a government funded broadcast news source that serves as the official institution for non-military broadcasting, “Arguably, the First Amendment is also the most important to the maintenance of a democratic government.” A democracy needs these three pillars to run effectively. Freedom of speech allows for a free-flowing exchange and expansion of ideas. Freedom of the press allows the people to know what their leaders accountable to and helps keep them accountable. Freedom to assemble helps the minority escape the tyranny of the majority.
And freedom of speech, especially the freedom to speak out against American leaders and systems, was never meant to be un American. It is the foundation from which American democracy was built. But when something is anti-Trump, Mr. Trump warps it to make it seem like it is anti-American, and he has his supporters convinced. His approval rating holds steady at between 38-45%.
The success of the Colin Kaepernick ad, or the continuing protests in the NFL, or the NFL’s ratings, is besides the point. The remaining question is, will the American people allow Trump to fully undermine their democracy? And what will Americans do to get back on track?
