Tag: Colin Kaepernick

Colin Kaepernick tried to tell white America

Kap’s words and actions in 2016 are as important now as they were then

By Martenzie Johnson

There’s been a lot of misinformation and conjecture over the past four years when discussing former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick and his decision, in the summer of 2016, to sit and later kneel during the playing of the national anthem.

But let’s take it back to the beginning.

On Aug. 26, 2016, before a preseason game against the Green Bay Packers, Kaepernick was spotted by multiple media members sitting on the San Francisco 49ers team bench as “The Star-Spangled Banner” played ahead of kickoff. Immediately after the game, NFL Media reporter Steve Wyche asked the then-28-year-old about why he was sitting during the anthem.

Kaepernick responded: “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.”

With the recent events taking place in Minneapolis following the death of George Floyd, a 46-year-old black man, and in Louisville, Kentucky, following the death of Breonna Taylor, a 26-year-old black woman, both at the hands of police officers, it’s important to go back to Kaepernick’s words and actions from 2016, especially as uprisings have taken part in multiple cities since Monday.

After Kaepernick’s quotes were published following the 2016 preseason game, there was immediate backlash from a sizable portion of the population. Kaepernick was labeled anti-cop, anti-military, so on and so forth. A league executive called him a “traitor.” Kaepernick received countless death threats. Despite helping lead the 49ers to the Super Bowl three years before his demonstration, Kaepernick hasn’t been signed to an NFL team since he became a free agent in 2017. All because his simple words – that law enforcement should be held accountable for killing citizens – urged white Americans to look at themselves in the mirror after centuries of being able to ignore the plight of black Americans.

What Kaepernick said and did was controversial, but only for those who see controversy in asking for basic human rights for African Americans that allegedly were afforded to them under the 14th Amendment nearly two centuries ago.

San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick kneels during the national anthem before an NFL game against the Dallas Cowboys in Santa Clara, California, Oct. 2, 2016.MARCIO JOSE SANCHEZ/AP PHOTO

The first three weeks after initially sitting for the national anthem, Kaepernick clearly explained to the media the reasoning behind his protest.

On what would make him stand for the anthem again: “I’m going to continue to stand with the people that are being oppressed. To me, this is something that has to change. When there’s significant change and I feel that flag represents what it’s supposed to represent, and this country is representing people the way that it’s supposed to, I’ll stand.”

On whether his message was against the armed forces: “The media painted this as I’m anti-American, anti-men and women of the military, and that’s not the case at all. I realize that men and women of the military go out and sacrifice their lives and put their selves in harm’s way for my freedom of speech and my freedoms in this country, and my freedom to take a seat or take a knee, so I have the utmost respect for them and I think what I did was taken out of context and spun a different way.”

On whom he was protesting for: “I couldn’t see another ‘hashtag Sandra Bland, hashtag Tamir Rice, hashtag Walter Scott, hashtag Eric Garner,’ the list goes on and on and on. … At what point do we do something about it? At what point do we take a stand and as a people say this isn’t right? You have a badge, yes. You’re supposed to be protecting us, not murdering us, and that’s what the issue really is and we need to change that.”

With those comments, Kaepernick wasn’t some “traitor.” Instead, he became a black light for identifying the racists who live among us.

Kaepernick precisely said police shouldn’t be able to kill unarmed black people without consequence. But some people in the country, when told of unlawful and racist actions by the police against black people, chose to ignore the “black people” portion of the protest and took umbrage at accusations of racism. Hit dogs, after all, will holler.

Fast forward to this week, and everything Kaepernick laid out four years ago is still happening. As Floyd was apprehended by police on Monday, a white Minneapolis officer can be seen on video later released on social media digging his knee into Floyd’s neck as Floyd screamed, “I can’t breathe.” In March, Taylor was killed by Louisville police after officers charged into her apartment after midnight while looking for a man who did not live at Taylor’s residence. Taylor was shot eight times by the officers.

Kaepernick began his protests in 2016 following the highly publicized deaths of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile by police officers in Louisiana and Minnesota, respectively, silently protesting to bring awareness to police misconduct and racial inequality in the country. His tactics were deemed inappropriate by many.

In light of the alleged killings of Floyd and Taylor at the hands of law enforcement, communities in Minneapolis and Louisville (and other cities, including Los Angeles) have reacted with anger. Since Floyd’s slaying on Monday, people in Minneapolis have protested every day, burning down multiple buildings, including a police precinct.  On Thursday night, seven people were shot at a protest in Louisville while demonstrators took over streets and caused some property damage.

The criticism was swift.

“How do we build trust between the community and the police? Let’s go steal s— from Target. Looters are the absolute scum of the earth,” tweeted former Packers and Detroit Lions offensive lineman T.J. Lang about the Minneapolis demonstrations.

“How does looting, rioting and destroying your OWN community bring justice for anyone?” asked Fox News personality Tomi Lahren. (At the time of his initial protest in 2016, Lahren tweeted that Kaepernick should “leave” America if “this country disgusts you so much.”)

To some, violent riots aren’t the right way to go about social change. Property damage or looting, the thinking goes, does nothing but push more people against your cause. Never mind that Martin Luther King Jr., one of the “good ones” to some in white America, once said that “a riot is the language of the unheard.”

But negative reactions to recent protests add an extra level of irony when thinking about Kaepernick. If burning down businesses and disrupting traffic on highways are the wrong ways to protest, would a silent, nonviolent protest that intelligently lays out its arguments and demands suffice? Perhaps one that prioritized sitting down over standing up?

Nearly four years ago, Kaepernick caused a national controversy when he said that it was wrong that police officers can get away with killing people. In the wake of Floyd’s killing, many in the sports world have spoken out: LeBron James, Tom Brady, Carson Wentz, the Minnesota Vikings, Minnesota Timberwolves head coach Ryan Saunders. On Friday, four days after Floyd’s death, the former Minneapolis officer, Derek Chauvin, who was fired from the force on Tuesday, was charged with third-degree murder. Nearly three months after Taylor was killed, not a single Louisville officer has been arrested or charged.

Kaepernick told us this was wrong. America chose not to listen.

”Until people are shameful of their privilege, nothing meaningful will change.” Gregory Owens Sr.

Kaepernick and the debate over ‘authentic’ blackness

Some supporters of the controversial quarterback criticize others as traitors or sellouts, a tactic that goes back to Du Bois and Malcolm X

By Michael A. Fletcher

In some ways, the on-and-off friction over Colin Kaepernick among black people is as old as black activism itself. Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty Images

How did Colin Kaepernick become a litmus test for authentic blackness?Some of Kaepernick’s supporters have denounced people who disagree with aspects of his protest as racial traitors. The repeated attacks formed a disturbing subplot to the Kaepernick saga not long after he began kneeling during the national anthem to call urgent attention to police brutality and racial inequality. The discord has arisen repeatedly as Kaepernick’s three-year exile from the NFL increasingly looks like it will be permanent.

The quarterback’s closest backers have suggested that they feel betrayed by anyone who partners with the league they accuse of blackballing him — even if those partners share his goals. Ironically, even as Kaepernick remains sidelined, legions of black NFL fans have been tuning in to watch a new generation of black quarterbacks lead a resurgence of interest in the NFL. But that has not stopped Kaepernick’s backers from firing rhetorical salvos at African Americans they see as lending comfort to the NFL.

The tension burst into view before the start of the current football season when Kaepernick supporters called out hip-hop mogul Jay-Z after his company, Roc Nation, signed a deal to advise the NFL on social justice and entertainment projects, including next month’s Super Bowl halftime show.

Jay-Z’s past support of Kaepernick and his long history of using his money and cultural cachet to promote social justice hardly seemed to matter to his critics. Not long after the deal was announced, for instance, the hashtag #JayZSellout was trending on Black Twitter.

Carolina Panthers safety Eric Reid, one of Kaepernick’s closest friends, was no kinder in 2018 when he denounced Philadelphia Eagles safety Malcolm Jenkins, a leader of the Players Coalition, as a “neo-colonialist” after the NFL announced an $89 million pledge to the coalition to promote social justice advocacy and programs.

Similar views were echoed in a torrent of social media posts directed at ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith and Jason Whitlock of Fox Sports in November. Both had criticized Kaepernick for turning his back on an NFL-arranged workout that was billed as an opportunity for him to get back into the league. Many of the critics pointedly questioned the racial loyalty of the two prominent black commentators.

Colin Kaepernick’s activism has undoubtedly raised awareness of issues civil rights leaders work on daily, even if it at times has caused dissension. PHOTO BY CARMEN MANDATO/GETTY IMAGES

Racial authenticity is often invoked to simultaneously raise the stakes in a dispute and shut it down. “To use race is also a form of coercion,” essayist and cultural critic Darryl Pinckney said in an email. “It says, ‘My argument is unanswerable because it comes from the moral high ground of my inherited history’.”

That can be true even when the parties on either side of a disagreement share the same history — and the same goals. All of that is intensified by the hothouse of social media, where many of these arguments play out. People are “canceled” all the time, mainly for being willing to compromise or otherwise demonstrating their impurity. Nuance or context is often taken for weakness on those platforms.

“I think it is very unfortunate that people choose to engage like that around Kaepernick, because everyone is trying to pursue their own path of activism,” said Samuel T. Livingston, director of the African American Studies Program at Morehouse College. “There is no one way to engage in that activism. There is no one way to be black or to be black and an activist.”

The most visible opposition to Kaepernick’s protest has come from prominent white people, including President Donald Trump and Fox News commentators Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson. Polls have shown that while most black NFL fans hold a favorable view of Kaepernick, the reverse is true for white fans. All of that has added to the racial cast of the debate surrounding Kaepernick, leading some of his supporters to contend that if you in any way oppose him, or his tactics, you are lending credence to his (mostly white) detractors.

After Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said he would not tolerate players on his team protesting during the national anthem, black quarterback Dak Prescott said he was unbothered. “We know about social injustice,” he told reporters. “I’m up for taking the next step, whatever that step might be, for action.”

For that, Prescott was pilloried — often in racial terms. “When Jerry Jones, who owns America’s team,” drew a line in the sand, “Dak Prescott is out here basically saying he’s happy being a lemonade serving house negro,” tweeted Shadow League columnist Carron J. Phillips.

The impulse for ideological purity and lining up behind a perceived leader is not unique to African Americans, nor does it come into play only around racial issues.

Some fervent supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders say “Bernie or bust,” meaning they are not sure they will back the 2020 Democratic nominee if Sanders is not on the ballot. On the flip side, for many years, some conservative Republicans derided moderates in their party as RINOS — Republican in Name Only.

In some ways, the on-and-off friction over Kaepernick among black people is as old as black activism itself. In his 1903 classic, The Souls of Black Folk, W.E.B. Du Bois said black Americans have tended toward three basic responses to their circumstances in America: revolt and revenge, an attempt to adjust to the will of the majority, and a focused effort at self-development.

Over the decades, many have viewed “revolt and revenge” as the most authentically black, even if elements of all three responses might be necessary to achieve lasting progress. That may be why the poet Amari Baraka once disparaged writer and playwright James Baldwin for being popular among white liberals. Or why Malcolm X called the likes of Martin Luther King Jr., Thurgood Marshall, Adam Clayton Powell Jr. and Jackie Robinson “Uncle Toms” for, one way or another, compromising with white people.

Jay-Z’s past support of Colin Kaepernick and his long history of using his money and cultural cachet to promote social justice hardly seemed to matter to his critics after his company, Roc Nation, signed a deal with the NFL.PHOTO BY JOE ROBBINS/GETTY IMAGES

Sometimes, the insults become circular. Du Bois himself was called an Uncle Tom by Marcus Garvey, who did not like interracial coalitions and integration. Then, Garvey was deemed a sellout — and much worse — for his many statements supporting the racist rhetoric of white supremacists, and for collaborating with the murderous Ku Klux Klan. Garvey, who thought returning to Africa was the best hope for African Americans, reasoned that he and the Klan shared a goal: racial separation.

Similarly, Marshall, who had been criticized by Malcolm X, used a similar tack in criticizing Nat King Cole. After the celebrated singer performed in front of a segregated audience in Alabama, Marshall, then a crusading civil rights lawyer, called him a racial traitor. “[All] Cole needs to complete his role as an Uncle Tom is a banjo,” Marshall said.

Until recently, no one would have guessed that Kaepernick would be seen as the test of black authenticity. He is the child of a white mother and black father, who grew up with adoptive white parents in the small city of Turlock in Central California. His political awakening began when he joined the Kappa Alpha Psi fraternity while he was a star quarterback at the University of Nevada. But that did not result in any overt activism for years. An outstanding and curious student, he read black history and sought out mentors, but he did not emerge as an activist until a rash of highly-publicized police shootings of black men led him to begin his protest in 2016.

“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color,” Kaepernick said then. “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.”

He has rarely spoken publicly during his exile from football. While he has millions of social media followers, he uses those platforms mainly to echo posts from his tight circle of supporters, to promote Nike products he is paid to endorse and to update people on how long he has been kept off NFL gridirons.

In his 1903 classic, The Souls of Black Folk, W.E.B. Du Bois said black Americans have tended toward three basic responses to their circumstances in America: revolt and revenge, an attempt to adjust to the will of the majority and a focused effort at self-development.PHOTO BY C M BATTEY/GETTY IMAGES

Much of his activism is achieved through symbols, and many of them are of what Du Bois would call the “revolt and revenge” ilk that contribute to the idea that Kaepernick somehow represents authentic blackness. There are shots of his billowing Afrophoto shoots evocative of 1960s black activists, and provocative T-shirts, such as the one bearing the name of the defiant (and fictional) slave Kunta Kinte that he wore to his abortive NFL tryout.

There can be little argument that Kaepernick’s stance has transformed him into a cultural force. If Kaepernick were still playing football, who would care when he was spotted in the stands at the US Open? Would it make news if he objected to the use of the original American flag on a pair of sneakers designed by Nike, the sporting goods behemoth he endorses? Or would his newly released, $110 Nike “True to 7” sneakers sell out in just hours? Certainly, there would not have be a dozen children’s bookswritten about him if he were still playing.“The Kaepernick dilemma is the black American dilemma in a nutshell: Black folk are outraged by the manifest mistreatment of a man who as a result of his principled stance has become an icon mentioned in league with some of our most noteworthy figures of the past.” — Michael Eric Dyson, social critic and Georgetown University professor

Yet, as uncomfortable as Kaepernick’s growing status as an icon of protest may be for the NFL, it is also true that the league has enjoyed a period of renewed prosperity since he has been sidelined. Led by the play of several top black quarterbacks, the NFL is enjoying a surge of popularity this season, even as one of its best-known black quarterbacks, Kaepernick, remains unsigned. Television ratings are up, and interest in the game — including from African Americans, the league’s most ardent fans — is high. His former team, the San Francisco 49ers, is returning to the Super Bowl for the first time since he took them there in 2013. Meanwhile, the sideline protests launched by Kaepernick were carried on by just two or three players this season.

Although some African Americans leaders called for a boycott of the NFL in the wake of the sidelining of Kaepernick, it seems like that did not happen. A poll by The Undefeated/Survey Monkey poll taken before last season’s Super Bowl found that a higher percentage of white fans than black fans said they were watching less football than the previous season (the poll did not pinpoint why). The survey found that 42% of white fans and 30% of black fans said they were watching less football than in previous seasons last year, and 13% of white people and 25% of black people said they were actually watching more football than in previous seasons.

“It remains true that the NFL is a great unifier for American sports fans, and the story lines just keep on coming,” said Jay Rosenstein, a former vice president of programming at CBS Sports. “It is hard to measure the effect of the debate over Kaepernick. For every person who says his actions were virtuous or unpatriotic, there seems to be many more people who are just going to watch their teams.”

Many African Americans are no doubt angry about what they see as the blackballing of a figure who risked his career to speak out for racial justice. But while black fans may be with Kaep, apparently few have gone as far as abandoning the NFL to show it. And no one is questioning anyone’s racial authenticity because they are interested in seeing Patrick Mahomes or Lamar Jackson perform on the field.

“The Kaepernick dilemma is the black American dilemma in a nutshell: Black folk are outraged by the manifest mistreatment of a man who as a result of his principled stance has become an icon mentioned in league with some of our most noteworthy figures of the past,” said Michael Eric Dyson, a social critic and Georgetown University professor. “Black folk wisely protest the administration of the Kaepernick case but affirm the value of the NFL — which has been horrible to a black man like Kaep, but has provided opportunity to black men by the thousands.”

None of that has diminished Kaepernick’s impact. His activism has undoubtedly raised awareness of issues civil rights leaders work on daily, even if it at times has caused dissension.

“I have a lot of respect for how he has used the platform that he has to model what change looks like,” said Rashad Robinson, executive director of Color of Change, a civil rights group. “His cultural advocacy has forced people to reckon with something they didn’t want to reckon with. What he has done has been a tremendous help to those of us who are working to kick out district attorneys who don’t value black lives. To change laws around money bail. To expose issues of policing and mass incarceration in deep ways. He has provided an on-ramp for people to have these conversations, to debate, to feel uncomfortable.”

Michael A. Fletcher is a senior writer at The Undefeated. He is a native New Yorker and longtime Baltimorean who enjoys live music and theater.

Did Colin Kaepernick win against the NFL?

By Gregory Owens Sr.

With last Friday’s big announcement that Colin Kaepernick and his former teammate Eric Reed formerly of the San Francisco 49ers, settled their collusion grievance case against the NFL without having to go the trial says a lot about both sides.

Clearly Kaepernick was facing the biggest foe of his career with his unwillingness to back down from kneeling during the national anthem to draw attention to police brutality and systemic oppression. Kaepernick believed that his social activism lead to the NFL owners colluding to keep him unemployed because of his political stance, that being despite repeatedly attempting to convince the public that he just wasn’t good enough anymore to play quarterback.  

Kaepernick’s case was expected to go to a full hearing sometime later this year, with the NFL facing the possibility of massive embarrassment and financial liability if it lost. It came to no big surprise that the league clearly needed an exit strategy to prevent further damaging their carefully guarded image, which has already taken a considerable hit in the area of race, and in health and safety for it’s players, that they would be extremely concerned about any additional future exposure.

The NFL is the most powerful sports conglomerate in the world with virtually inexhaustible financial resources. They have some of the best lawyers. For Commissioner Roger Goodell and the 32 billionaire owners he works for this settlement is a bad look for the league’s image, which clearly wanted to move beyond the damaging Kaepernick story.  

I believe for Kaepernick to have settled with the NFL points to financial compensation in a substantial way. With that being said, clearly he came out of this battle as a big winner and the NFL a wounded loser.

Dak Prescott isn’t a race traitor because he thinks there’s a better way to protest

By Brando Simeo Starkey      July 31, 2018 

Dallas Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott told reporters during a July 27 training camp news conference that he opposed protesting racial injustice during the national anthem. He staked out this territory after Stephen Jones, the team’s executive vice president and the son of Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, said players must stand “if they want to be a Dallas Cowboy.”

After Prescott delivered his remarks, some who support the protest movement excoriated him as a sellout.

This criticism reeks of unfairness.

For one, assailing another black person based on how a racist might use that person’s words has long struck me as slimy. Racial treachery does exist, but we find it by examining the words of the supposed turncoat on their own merit. If racism is a fundamentally immoral practice, then why wield the words of immorality to put another person down?

Although I disagree with Prescott, he simply voiced the opinion that many black football players likely have. At the news conference, Prescott gave a few reasons for not protesting, including the notion that the field was the wrong place for political agitation: “For me, I believe in doing something, action. It’s not about taking a knee. It’s not necessarily about standing. We can find a different place to make our country better.”

Prescott, in other words, believes these sorts of actions are best reserved for outside of the football stadium. Just a slim minority of players protested racial injustice during the anthem. Many of those who didn’t likely agree with Prescott, and that’s why they opted against participating. And that’s not treasonous. That’s a difference of opinion.

Using the feelings of bigots to tear down another black person must be shunned by well-meaning black folk.

Prescott also hinged his personal opposition to the protests on his belief that protesting “takes away from the joy and the love that football brings a lot of people.” This idea, that the NFL protests should be discouraged because the league provides a happy distraction from society’s ills, has been repeated by many detractors of the kneeling players. This criticism, however, fails to grapple with an obvious question: Who needs the distraction more than black people?

The notion that NFL football provides a unique sporting event that sends joy across the land like few other cultural practices rings true. Americans bask in the bliss of football Sundays, a time when people crowd into stadiums, sports bars and living rooms across the country to share jubilation in victory or sadness in defeat. Those 17 weeks in the fall and winter assume a profound part of our culture that identifies us as a people. Football offers us a respite from the world’s issues. Sporting events have long served this purpose in human history, since gladiator battles in the Colosseum. They certainly did so in the wake of Sept. 11, 2001, most memorably.

But if the NFL holds such a place in American culture, the place of happy distraction, we must ask ourselves the key question: Who needs this distraction more?

Colin Kaepernick ignited the protest movement in the wake of police shootings of black men and part of a culture that would rather avert its eyes from injustice than stare it down and fix it. Racism remains a social scourge, and Kaepernick, who dreamed about playing football since childhood, decided the joy he got from inside the stadium should be sacrificed to heal the pain outside of it. Other football players agreed, as dozens either kneeled during the anthem, raised their fists in solidarity with the struggle, or otherwise demonstrated that they too agreed with his mission.

Many black fans supported Kaepernick’s movement, even though football provided a major distraction from the racism pervading our culture. If racism is America’s most long-lasting problem, the victims of that are in most need of the distraction. Nearly 75 percent of black people support the protests; that shows that whatever is to be gained by football being a distraction is worth sacrificing to spur a conversation about how to rid society of white supremacy.

Prescott isn’t a sellout, but he does lack the imagination to use sports as a tool for cultural reformation. But by saying that he prefers to do his work outside of the field of play, he is putting the onus on himself to show that through deeds. He hasn’t done that yet, but the 25-year-old has time.

Otherwise, people will rightly conclude that he’s toeing the Jones family company line and trying to secure the big bag of money that might soon come his way.