Nobody’s Listening
Colin Kaepernick sat on the bench for the national anthem. After the initial firestorm, he took a moment to refine his protest. He spoke with a veteran on the best way to continue his protest. He decided to take a knee. But even before refining his method of protest his message was clear: This is about the systemic injustices plaguing minorities in this country.
The people who need to hear and understand the most recent wave of black protest aren’t listening. They aren’t listening to Kaepernick. They aren’t listening to Megan Rapinoe. They can’t tolerate the opinions of Charles Woodson or Adam Jones. Why is this? And what does it mean for America’s systemic problems going forward?
Avenues of Protest
The most common complaint about Kaepernick’s protest is the environment under which it occurred: during the national anthem. Those upset that it occurred during the anthem have suggested that it disrespects the troops or wasn’t “the right place or time” to stage a protest. These opinions miss the mark for two reasons: protests are supposed to be uncomfortable and Colin Kaepernick never intended to disrespect the troops.
At the peak of the Black Lives Matter protests, many of the complaints were over the nature of the protests. When people protested the deaths of Mike Brown and Freddie Gray, protesters were criticized for being violent. When people more peacefully protested the death of Eric Garner, people complained “Don’t all lives matter?”. When students and others protested on Massachusetts Avenue in front of my old dorm at MIT, people complained that protesters should select a method that didn’t block traffic. No matter the method, location, or individuals who spoke out, there has always existed a substantial portion of the American population to take issue with the avenue of protest. This demographic entirely misses the point: the purpose of protest is to make others engage in an issue by disrupting everyday events and routines. It is routine to stand for national anthem at a sporting event. That is why Kaepernick sat down, explained his position, and then refined his protest.
The secondary claim is that Kaepernick’s protest “disrespected the troops.” This could not be farther from the truth. One of the rights our troops have fought for is freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. Just like people are entitled to their right to disagree with the idea that systemic justice exists in America, Colin Kaepernick is allowed to stage a protest during the national anthem to draw attention to those injustices. There may be no better time than the national anthem to make a statement that says “hey, I think we could be doing a better job as a country with respect to this issue.” He did not disrupt anyone else’s ability to stand during the anthem and he did not disrupt the anthem singer or the troops present. This was a text book example of peaceful protest.
Dodging the Issue
If we establish the idea that Kaepernick conducted an effective form of protest without disrespecting anybody, then what is the issue? Simply put: Those who disagree with Kaepernick do not want to talk about issues of systemic injustice in America. This is why it appears that the only time and place to discuss these issues is out of the sight of those who don’t wish to hear it. But those who would choose to ignore this protest if given the opportunity are the same people who need to hear it the most. There are systemic issues in the American criminal justice system. That is a widely accepted statement. However, the great thing about many systemic issues is that once they are identified and accepted as problems, they can be fixed! This requires an acknowledgement from everyone that we as Americans can do better. Everyone. Average citizens. Cops and their unions. Liberals and conservatives. When you choose to misappropriate the meaning of Colin Kaepernick’s protest to an unrelated issue, you are part of the problem. If we are to remediate the issues in our criminal justice system, we will have focus on the problems in our criminal justice system.
Conclusion: Liberating Protest
One of the longer term concerns for me going forward is the role of protest in America. Black protest is under perpetual scrutiny and ridicule. This is unacceptable in a country that should be enabling dialogue and discussion. Those taking heat for their criticism of Kaepernick should not claim that the backlash they have received is due to political correctness. They are receiving backlash because they have used false criticism to cloak the true reason for their anger: Kaepernick made them uncomfortable. Throughout American history, citizens have regularly derided protest when it makes them uncomfortable. This unwillingness to engage in political discussion is detrimental to vibrant democracy. While I strongly disagree with his initial opinion on systemic injustice, Paul Finebaum of ESPN was at least willing to address Kaepernick’s motivation head on (He later apologized). Kaepernick utilized his current platform at its highest possible point of leverage to stage a protest and make a statement. It is incumbent on those upset by his choice of venue to determine why they are upset at what he’s doing and why they aren’t listening to what he’s saying.