Colin Kaepernick and Nike at it again

[TigerLion06]

I think you’re taking “radical” to mean something negative. Ending slavery was arguably not radical, according to Abraham Lincoln (and many people at the time of the founding). It was radical according to many of the people who formed the Confederacy. Giving the franchise to certain people was clearly not radical, since we were able to allow that through the normal political process.

I do think Kaepernick’s politics are radical, and that’s probably why he chose to protest the way he did. He’s said plenty of things that indicates he holds radical points of view. I think he’s wrong to think that way, but you don’t have to just because he’s a radical. But I do think we should acknowledge how radical some of the things he’s said are, and that the reactions he’s gotten might be because of his radicalism.

I also think you’ve entirely ignored the reformism of many activists in your reply to @yuthgi above. Those people didn’t just ignore problems in the country, but they also called upon the country’s ideals in order to solve those problems. Maybe we think those ideals aren’t adequate. But we should be clearer about where we’re coming from.

I'm not interested in anyone that says I'm focusing on the good not the bad. In the context he said it in. That's ridiculous. You have to agree with that. SMH.

Focusing on the good would've kept people like me without opportunity or rights. I'm glad people focused on what was bad about our great nation and continue to do so today to make it greater. Even our current president says make America great again. He's trying to create change for the good as he sees it at least. Not just focusing on the good but change. He's focusing on bad trade policy with China. He didn't focus on the deals he saw as good. He searched out and identified the flaws. What's wrong. Difference is people aren't interested in change that doesn't directly help them so it's viewed differently.

Still don't get how you don't consider those things I mentioned radical. That's not debatable at all. And just because it went through the normal political process has zero to do with it being radical or not. You gotta know better than that. C'mon. None of those ideas were presented and went through the first time without issue. Someone said, give black people the right to vote. Ok let's put it through the regular political process. Nope. Didn't happen that way. It was a radical idea. Outlandish idea to most. Same with slavery. Many in the North didn't even agree. There were tons of other reasons connected to that. Not just moral. And again, the normal political process statement. The process from beginning to end proved it way beyond radical. Integrating sports was radical. Women voting was radical. How can you even justify it wasn't. That makes me pause to anything you have to say related to that. There was tons of serious and organized opposition to the very idea of any of those things and it took decades and tons of resources and conversion to make it happen. The very ideas were radical.

I am curious as to what methods CK practice that coincide with his radical views. I'm assuming he's a communist or at the very least some extreme socialist, which I'm so far from that, I consider it radical as well. But let's focus on his methods. You said he was radical and that's why he chose to protest the way he did. Not sure how his methods are considered radical or coincide with radicalism. He raised a ton of money that he's shown on record that has gone directly to relevant causes. He was applauded by his critics for putting his own money where his mouth is. He even contributed to law enforcement. He's largely quiet and has operated that way since the beginning. Even his protest was peaceful. He said it was against police brutality and unfair treatment. Repeated that his actual kneeling instead of sitting quietly was done after getting the idea from a special forces soldier who wrote him a letter and he then met with. Even this last episode with Nike isn't radical on his part. He told them what he thought about the idea and they scrapped the plan. That's on Nike. He gave his opinion which could become deemed silly but radical? Ridiculous maybe. But again. What is radical about peaceful protest? He didn't urinate on the flag. He didn't burn the flag. He didn't hold it up, drop it and walk on it. All those things would be radical and outside of any process. What he does is actually the standard as set forth by our very own Constitution. Peacefully protesting. Compare him to what we've seen from MLK, Malcolm X, feminism and other minorities that challenged the government. CK pales in comparison on every level.

For the most part CK has been talk but no real action that impacts the average citizen. People get triggered by what he does but what does he really do? If people took their own advice and chose not to be offended by CK what power does he have? He's not keeping you or I from an educational opportunity or a job. He's not getting you or I arrested or violating our rights in any way. You can argue the average black citizen isn't being impacted by him other than him having conversations about police brutality. Which existed long before him. Why are people so afraid of CK? And don't say they aren't because they are. Maybe not you. But I want to know why.

 

[yuthgi]

I'm not interested in anyone that says I'm focusing on the good not the bad. In the context he said it in. That's ridiculous. You have to agree with that. SMH.

Focusing on the good would've kept people like me without opportunity or rights. I'm glad people focused on what was bad about our great nation and continue to do so today to make it greater. Even our current president says make America great again. He's trying to create change for the good as he sees it at least. Not just focusing on the good but change. He's focusing on bad trade policy with China. He didn't focus on the deals he saw as good. He searched out and identified the flaws. What's wrong. Difference is people aren't interested in change that doesn't directly help them so it's viewed differently.

Still don't get how you don't consider those things I mentioned radical. That's not debatable at all. And just because it went through the normal political process has zero to do with it being radical or not. You gotta know better than that. C'mon. None of those ideas were presented and went through the first time without issue. Someone said, give black people the right to vote. Ok let's put it through the regular political process. Nope. Didn't happen that way. It was a radical idea. Outlandish idea to most. Same with slavery. Many in the North didn't even agree. There were tons of other reasons connected to that. Not just moral. And again, the normal political process statement. The process from beginning to end proved it way beyond radical. Integrating sports was radical. Women voting was radical. How can you even justify it wasn't. That makes me pause to anything you have to say related to that. There was tons of serious and organized opposition to the very idea of any of those things and it took decades and tons of resources and conversion to make it happen. The very ideas were radical.

I am curious as to what methods CK practice that coincide with his radical views. I'm assuming he's a communist or at the very least some extreme socialist, which I'm so far from that, I consider it radical as well. But let's focus on his methods. You said he was radical and that's why he chose to protest the way he did. Not sure how his methods are considered radical or coincide with radicalism. He raised a ton of money that he's shown on record that has gone directly to relevant causes. He was applauded by his critics for putting his own money where his mouth is. He even contributed to law enforcement. He's largely quiet and has operated that way since the beginning. Even his protest was peaceful. He said it was against police brutality and unfair treatment. Repeated that his actual kneeling instead of sitting quietly was done after getting the idea from a special forces soldier who wrote him a letter and he then met with. Even this last episode with Nike isn't radical on his part. He told them what he thought about the idea and they scrapped the plan. That's on Nike. He gave his opinion which could become deemed silly but radical? Ridiculous maybe. But again. What is radical about peaceful protest? He didn't urinate on the flag. He didn't burn the flag. He didn't hold it up, drop it and walk on it. All those things would be radical and outside of any process. What he does is actually the standard as set forth by our very own Constitution. Peacefully protesting. Compare him to what we've seen from MLK, Malcolm X, feminism and other minorities that challenged the government. CK pales in comparison on every level.

For the most part CK has been talk but no real action that impacts the average citizen. People get triggered by what he does but what does he really do? If people took their own advice and chose not to be offended by CK what power does he have? He's not keeping you or I from an educational opportunity or a job. He's not getting you or I arrested or violating our rights in any way. You can argue the average black citizen isn't being impacted by him other than him having conversations about police brutality. Which existed long before him. Why are people so afraid of CK? And don't say they aren't because they are. Maybe not you. But I want to know why.

Whatever! If you you think i meant that i don't want America to improve, grow and learn from its mistakes, then i can't help you. If you can't understand that keeping that which is good and changing what needs to be changed is also "GOOD" then i also can't help you there either. The United States of America is a young country and still developing. The country has and still is progressing but there are ideals that are (and have always been) "good:" individual freedom, the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness, the freedom to exercise religion.

 

[Fanofthehill]

The only way to make Nike take notice is to stop buying their products. They are a private company so they have the right to do as they please BUT the consumers have other options outside of Nike as well.

Their products are garbage and I Never buy Nike....especially since sh_t head, racist and no good former football player is their mouth piece!

 

[MoonlightGrahamCracker]

Don’t don’t tell me what you think I want to hear. You have no idea what I hear. I agree with you - your right to speak your opinion includes my right to be free from your opinion.

Now about Kap and the flag.... He sees the flag and the National anthem as representing something evil, dirty or anti-American. I call that a glass half empty mentality. He views America as place of unfairness and oppression. I see the flag as representing an ideal of freedom, democracy, and individual rights. I am honored to stand under the raising of the flag and the playing of the national anthem. I focus not on the nation’s flaws, but on her triumphs and greatness. Kap asks - like a lot of liberals - when was America ever great?

Do you hear me now?

When was America ever great and above criticism? When institutions in this country have more often than not worked on your behalf rather than against it, standing with pride is a lot easier...

 

[ChicagoTiger85]

I'm not interested in anyone that says I'm focusing on the good not the bad. In the context he said it in. That's ridiculous. You have to agree with that. SMH.

Focusing on the good would've kept people like me without opportunity or rights. I'm glad people focused on what was bad about our great nation and continue to do so today to make it greater. Even our current president says make America great again. He's trying to create change for the good as he sees it at least. Not just focusing on the good but change. He's focusing on bad trade policy with China. He didn't focus on the deals he saw as good. He searched out and identified the flaws. What's wrong. Difference is people aren't interested in change that doesn't directly help them so it's viewed differently.

Still don't get how you don't consider those things I mentioned radical. That's not debatable at all. And just because it went through the normal political process has zero to do with it being radical or not. You gotta know better than that. C'mon. None of those ideas were presented and went through the first time without issue. Someone said, give black people the right to vote. Ok let's put it through the regular political process. Nope. Didn't happen that way. It was a radical idea. Outlandish idea to most. Same with slavery. Many in the North didn't even agree. There were tons of other reasons connected to that. Not just moral. And again, the normal political process statement. The process from beginning to end proved it way beyond radical. Integrating sports was radical. Women voting was radical. How can you even justify it wasn't. That makes me pause to anything you have to say related to that. There was tons of serious and organized opposition to the very idea of any of those things and it took decades and tons of resources and conversion to make it happen. The very ideas were radical.

I am curious as to what methods CK practice that coincide with his radical views. I'm assuming he's a communist or at the very least some extreme socialist, which I'm so far from that, I consider it radical as well. But let's focus on his methods. You said he was radical and that's why he chose to protest the way he did. Not sure how his methods are considered radical or coincide with radicalism. He raised a ton of money that he's shown on record that has gone directly to relevant causes. He was applauded by his critics for putting his own money where his mouth is. He even contributed to law enforcement. He's largely quiet and has operated that way since the beginning. Even his protest was peaceful. He said it was against police brutality and unfair treatment. Repeated that his actual kneeling instead of sitting quietly was done after getting the idea from a special forces soldier who wrote him a letter and he then met with. Even this last episode with Nike isn't radical on his part. He told them what he thought about the idea and they scrapped the plan. That's on Nike. He gave his opinion which could become deemed silly but radical? Ridiculous maybe. But again. What is radical about peaceful protest? He didn't urinate on the flag. He didn't burn the flag. He didn't hold it up, drop it and walk on it. All those things would be radical and outside of any process. What he does is actually the standard as set forth by our very own Constitution. Peacefully protesting. Compare him to what we've seen from MLK, Malcolm X, feminism and other minorities that challenged the government. CK pales in comparison on every level.

For the most part CK has been talk but no real action that impacts the average citizen. People get triggered by what he does but what does he really do? If people took their own advice and chose not to be offended by CK what power does he have? He's not keeping you or I from an educational opportunity or a job. He's not getting you or I arrested or violating our rights in any way. You can argue the average black citizen isn't being impacted by him other than him having conversations about police brutality. Which existed long before him. Why are people so afraid of CK? And don't say they aren't because they are. Maybe not you. But I want to know why.

Seems like we’re at a disconnect about what the word “radical” means. It doesn’t just mean that something’s a big deal or that it was controversial. I certainly wouldn’t disagree that women’s enfranchisement or ending slavery were that, but neither development required overthrowing the current system or constitution.

Please read my post above about the difference between radicalism and reformism and maybe you’ll get a better idea of where I’m coming from.

 

[ChicagoTiger85]

When was America ever great and above criticism? When institutions in this country have more often than not worked on your behalf rather than against it, standing with pride is a lot easier...

This is pretty clearly not what his post was saying. The question is whether those institutions were flawed fundamentally, or whether they were flawed because they strayed from America’s ideals.

 

[TigerLion06]

Seems like we’re at a disconnect about what the word “radical” means. It doesn’t just mean that something’s a big deal or that it was controversial. I certainly wouldn’t disagree that women’s enfranchisement or ending slavery were that, but neither development required overthrowing the current system or constitution.

Please read my post above about the difference between radicalism and reformism and maybe you’ll get a better idea of where I’m coming from.

I don't have much of a problem with what you're saying overall. I just don't think CK fits that mold of radicalism. He's worked within the ideals of the system. Operated within the rights given in our constitution. He's largely reacted to one issue. He's small potatoes. He used the flag to bring attention to an issue in a very civil manner. I just don't think he's earned the stripes to be a radical by your definition. You've explained yourself well. I don't think the other guy fit in the reformist category. Maybe he didn't explain himself very well but his statement was very clear and enough for me. I think you explained what you hoped he meant and that's respectable. He took a harder line and I can't respect that. He's entitled to his opinion but he clearly didn't give a damn about any interests except for his own with his statement. He tried to clean it up but I got it the first time. Again I'm good with what you said. Plenty of solid info and perspective.

 

[scartiger]

Well I agree with the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King.
@24TIGER please tell Rev. Franklin Graham thanks for posting this. Happy 4th Of July to you and to everyone else on board. God Bless the USA!


After Nike designed a USA-themed sneaker with the Betsy Ross flag in celebration of the July Fourth holiday, guess who objected? Colin Kaepernick. He called it offensive, he said, because of its connection to an era of slavery. The flag doesn’t represent slavery or white supremacy—it represents the original 13 colonies and their independence! My friend, Dr. Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., put it well, “I am not so sure brother Kaepernick even totally understands who Betsy Ross is. I think it’s kind of unfortunate that we are fighting over sneakers when we should be celebrating living in the best country on the planet.” She is absolutely right. If we focused more on being thankful to God for the blessings and freedoms we have in America, we might realize it is something to be cherished, defended, and celebrated rather than protested.

 

[scartiger]

How about this photo.

 

[ChicagoTiger85]

I don't have much of a problem with what you're saying overall. I just don't think CK fits that mold of radicalism. He's worked within the ideals of the system. Operated within the rights given in our constitution. He's largely reacted to one issue. He's small potatoes. He used the flag to bring attention to an issue in a very civil manner. I just don't think he's earned the stripes to be a radical by your definition. You've explained yourself well. I don't think the other guy fit in the reformist category. Maybe he didn't explain himself very well but his statement was very clear and enough for me. I think you explained what you hoped he meant and that's respectable. He took a harder line and I can't respect that. He's entitled to his opinion but he clearly didn't give a damn about any interests except for his own with his statement. He tried to clean it up but I got it the first time. Again I'm good with what you said. Plenty of solid info and perspective.

Here’s one reason I think that:



This is pretty par for the course for him, and he takes Douglass out of context.

 

[TigerLion06]

Here’s one reason I think that:

View embedded media

This is pretty par for the course for him, and he takes Douglass out of context.

Kap is clearly angry. I didn't know he tweeted that. I don't follow him and I'm not concerned with anything he has to say or any opinion he has. He has zero impact on my life yet he's triggering a large number of people.

As for Frederick Douglass...he said that and many other things and he believed it as fact just as Kap does. Douglass is on record saying many other similar things. How is that taken out of context? Nothing was done at that time with slaves as benefitting parties. That's a fact.

The difference is today America has come a long way. And many are working to keep improving. I embrace the new America. At the same time we need to keep the pressure on those negative forces that rear their ugly heads.

When the forces I complain about are operating, they keep me from opportunity, scare the crap out of me and my family with actual physical danger. Kap has zero power, is not endangering a single person or taking away a single opportunity or job from anyone. He is powerless. He is a Boogeyman. You can actually ignore him.

 

[ChicagoTiger85]

Kap is clearly angry. I didn't know he tweeted that. I don't follow him and I'm not concerned with anything he has to say or any opinion he has. He has zero impact on my life yet he's triggering a large number of people.

As for Frederick Douglass...he said that and many other things and he believed it as fact just as Kap does. Douglass is on record saying many other similar things. How is that taken out of context? Nothing was done at that time with slaves as benefitting parties. That's a fact.

The difference is today America has come a long way. And many are working to keep improving. I embrace the new America. At the same time we need to keep the pressure on those negative forces that rear their ugly heads.

When the forces I complain about are operating, they keep me from opportunity, scare the crap out of me and my family with actual physical danger. Kap has zero power, is not endangering a single person or taking away a single opportunity or job from anyone. He is powerless. He is a Boogeyman. You can actually ignore him.

Read the rest of the Douglass speech. He goes on to say he doesn’t despair of the country, and believes it can live up to its ideals.

 

[Rychek4]

Thankfully Colin Kaepernick is keeping an eye out for us and not letting us make choices that he would find offensive

View embedded media

Not that a Betsy Ross flag shoe is something I would probably buy, but at least now I don’t have that choice. Thank goodness - I might have chosen wrong.

Kaepernick is an idiot exploiting his social... media... position to make up for his lack of NFL talent.