Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1097093 Posts in 72569 Topics- by 19545 Members - Latest Member: cepatinog
Jump to:  
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Disgraceful NFL  (Read 7929 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
B0B
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Jun 27, 2008
Posts: 5932

View Profile
« Reply #220 on: Sep 29, 2017, 07:30AM »

but my question is and has been (which I don't think you've addressed) are the protesters hurting their own cause by using a means of protest that people react so negatively to?

They are challenging the status quo. The only method that does that and does not get a negative reaction is a method that also gets no traction.

Think back to your MLK references... They were incredibly peaceful. And yet... how many times was he jailed? His home blown up? Murdered in cold blood? His supporters attacked? John Lewis still bears the scars from being assaulted by police in a peaceful walk to the Alabama capital. How many peaceful blacks were lynched? How many churches burned?

Or Ghandi. The British killed 400 non-violent protestors in a single event simply for resisting.

If there is a protest that will get traction and positive response... I have little doubt they would love to do it. But historically... what meaningful protest to power has occurred, even very peaceful ones, that have no generated negative reactions? Even just asking for the rights of civil gay marriage stirred a very strong decade long resistance that even played a major role in reelecting a president.
Logged
elmsandr

*
Offline Offline

Location: Howell, MI
Joined: Apr 12, 2004
Posts: 3373

View Profile
« Reply #221 on: Sep 29, 2017, 08:32AM »

Bob, I've actually been stuck home sick the past couple days and have had too much time on my hands, so excuse me if I come across as being overly argumentative.  I'm personally not offended by the protests, but I do know veterans that are so I was just trying to represent their views in what seemed like a very one sided discussion.  I know these veterans for the most part to be decent people who do their best to treat everyone equally.  I understand the do no harm part of the equation you are getting at.  I get where your coming from, and I do see all of your points.  I'm not trying to diminish their message in any way. but my question is and has been (which I don't think you've addressed) are the protesters hurting their own cause by using a means of protest that people react so negatively to?        
Except... the Cowboys were booed.  They kneeled as a team, then stood up for the anthem.  They were booed.  Pretty sure that says it doesn't really matter the method.  It is the who and the what of the protest.  The how just gives the first line of cover.  The kneeling was added by Kap specifically after meeting with veterans and they suggested it as a sign of respect.  Funny, it is still seen as disrespectful.  It isn't now, nor has it ever been about the flag.  They would just find some other reason to complain.

Cheers,
Andy
Logged

Andrew Elms
Radar

*
Offline Offline

Location: Rochester NY
Joined: Feb 23, 2012
Posts: 763

View Profile
« Reply #222 on: Sep 29, 2017, 09:37AM »

OK, I see your point, and I'm going to make this my final post on the subject, since I've really been mostly playing devils advocate here because all of the one sidedness of the discussion was getting boring.  I just don't think the protesters are reaching the right people.  Look at the discussion here, you have a bunch of people who agree with them talking about the merits of what they are doing.  The only two dissenting opinions have been cut out of the discussion.  This form of protest has given many (mostly Trump supporters) the opportunity to ignore their message and wrap themselves in the flag.  What is the protestors desired outcome, who are they trying to reach, and are they making progress towards their goals?  Yes to some degree they are opening up discussion and discourse, but are the right people talking about it.  The main objective of the Civil Rights movement was to strike down the Jim Crow laws in the south.  They accomplished that goal (with the help of a lot of sympathetic white Baby Boomers, my peers), now we have a different battle to win.  We did the easy part we got the unfair laws abolished, separate but equal is no longer legal.  Now we have the laws and the fight is to change attitudes, will the same tactics that worked then work now?  Maybe they will maybe they won't.  In one of my previous posts I had offered alternatives (you can go back and find it if you look) and those alternatives were all summarily dismissed.  I'm not anti-kneeler I just suspect that the people who need to hear their message the most aren't getting it because of the form of the protest.  Maybe they would just not get it regardless of how the protest was done.  My main point in all of this was really not to attack those kneeling in protest, but to get us thinking about should we be doing something else that might be more productive and reach the people who need to hear the message the most.  I really don't know what the solution is, I'm only one individual with limited resources what we need to build is consensus and solidarity behind the cause, are we doing that?  Are we leaving out some allies in the fight who honestly feel that the kneeling protest is offensive in it's form?  If all we're going to do is talk amongst ourselves about how bad things are and not include those who disagree in the discussion are we going to get anywhere?
Logged
Baron von Bone
Fear is the Mind-Killer.

*
Offline Offline

Location: Athens, GA (USA)
Joined: Jul 16, 2002
Posts: 18814
"Reality Junkie"


View Profile
« Reply #223 on: Sep 29, 2017, 09:55AM »

Except... the Cowboys were booed.  They kneeled as a team, then stood up for the anthem.  They were booed.  Pretty sure that says it doesn't really matter the method.  It is the who and the what of the protest.  The how just gives the first line of cover.  The kneeling was added by Kap specifically after meeting with veterans and they suggested it as a sign of respect.  Funny, it is still seen as disrespectful.  It isn't now, nor has it ever been about the flag.  They would just find some other reason to complain.

I'm not sure that's the most accurate take-away from this case. It's at least arguable that it demonstrates just how provocative and distractionary it is to base a protest on a sacred symbol (noting my position on that).
 
Human brain owners react first, then come up with the justification. This is why we have to invest in the sound process of vetting our sentiments and inclinations and perceptions and the conclusions that come from them. Unfortunately we don't have the option of disciplining the initial reaction out of us--got to learn to accept that our sentiments and perceptions and such need vigilant vetting and frequent modification, if we value what's real and true over what we feel.
 
English note:
Kneeled has recently become technically okay as an alternative to the traditional knelt (just because you made me look that up ... heh).
Logged

- Feeding a troll just gives it a platform and amplifies its voice.
 
- Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves.  - Richard Feynman
- He who knows not and knows not that he knows not is a fool.   - Confucius
Piano man
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Feb 10, 2006
Posts: 10041

View Profile
« Reply #224 on: Sep 29, 2017, 10:52AM »

Radar, I get where you're coming from--that as a practical matter, the protests might do more harm than good, even though you're not personally offended by them.

This is something I posted earlier, and you could probably answer it better than anyone else here:

Suppose the Kaepernick 'kneel' never happened. Instead, suppose one white player, who regarded Pat Tillman as a friend and mentor, knelt during the anthem as a humble tribute to his friends and to others who gave the ultimate sacrifice fighting under the flag. Suppose other players joined him in silent tribute to our fallen warriors.

Would vets still be offended?
Logged

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so." --Mark Twain
Radar

*
Offline Offline

Location: Rochester NY
Joined: Feb 23, 2012
Posts: 763

View Profile
« Reply #225 on: Sep 29, 2017, 11:11AM »

Radar, I get where you're coming from--that as a practical matter, the protests might do more harm than good, even though you're not personally offended by them.

This is something I posted earlier, and you could probably answer it better than anyone else here:

Suppose the Kaepernick 'kneel' never happened. Instead, suppose one white player, who regarded Pat Tillman as a friend and mentor, knelt during the anthem as a humble tribute to his friends and to others who gave the ultimate sacrifice fighting under the flag. Suppose other players joined him in silent tribute to our fallen warriors.

Would vets still be offended?
I would suspect that there would be less outrage over a Pat Tillman tribute, than there was to Kaepernick's protest.  I think a tribute would be better received than a protest, but I do think there would still be some who are sticklers for protocol who would still bring up that kneeling during the Anthem wasn't appropriate and ask him to do it another time.  I see the hypocrisy of the two situations, and I also don't deny that there are a few out there whose opposition to the kneeling is racially motivated (whether consciously or sub-consciously).   
Logged
Piano man
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Feb 10, 2006
Posts: 10041

View Profile
« Reply #226 on: Sep 29, 2017, 12:01PM »

I would suspect that there would be less outrage over a Pat Tillman tribute, than there was to Kaepernick's protest.  I think a tribute would be better received than a protest, but I do think there would still be some who are sticklers for protocol who would still bring up that kneeling during the Anthem wasn't appropriate and ask him to do it another time.  I see the hypocrisy of the two situations, and I also don't deny that there are a few out there whose opposition to the kneeling is racially motivated (whether consciously or sub-consciously).   

I just want to separate the antipathy for the purpose of the demonstration from offense at kneeling during the anthem. I think the great majority of people raising hell over this aren't sticklers for protocol at all. How many of them stand at home during the anthem? How many of them protest businesses that use the flag in their logo, or take offense at 'patriotic' clothing with the American flag?

To the extent these genuine 'sticklers' exist, they'd probably be within your vet's group, because you have more specific training in this regard. You also raise a good point that not only is the subject different, but there's a difference between a tribute and a protest.

I just like to sort these things out.
Logged

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so." --Mark Twain
Russ White

*
Offline Offline

Location: Orange City, Fl
Joined: Feb 27, 2007
Posts: 5274

View Profile
« Reply #227 on: Sep 29, 2017, 12:03PM »

Here's a post worthy of a read. Sadly, from what I can tell from where I got it, the folks who would most benefit from it won't bother to read it.

How it all started, and how we got here.

(Unfortunately, the people that could learn something by reading this likely won't bother).

Did you know this?
Aug 14, 2016- Colin Kaepernick sits for the national anthem.....and no one noticed.

Aug 20th, 2016- Colin again sits, and again, no one noticed.

Aug 26th, 2016- Colin sits and this time he is met with a level of vitriol unseen against an athlete. Even the future President of the United States took shots at him while on the campaign trail. Colin went on to explain his protest had NOTHING to with the military, but he felt it hard to stand for a flag that didn't treat people of color fairly.

Then on on Aug 30th, 2016 Nate Boyer, a former Army Green Beret turned NFL long snapper, penned an open letter to Colin in the Army Times. In it he expressed how Colin's sitting affected him.

Then a strange thing happened. Colin was able to do what most Americans to date have not...
He listened.

In his letter, Mr. Boyer writes:
"Iím not judging you for standing up for what you believe in. Itís your inalienable right. What you are doing takes a lot of courage, and Iíd be lying if I said I knew what it was like to walk around in your shoes. Iíve never had to deal with prejudice because of the color of my skin, and for me to say I can relate to what youíve gone through is as ignorant as someone whoís never been in a combat zone telling me they understand what itís like to go to war.
Even though my initial reaction to your protest was one of anger, Iím trying to listen to what youíre saying and why youíre doing it."

Mr. Boyer goes on to write "There are already plenty people fighting fire with fire, and itís just not helping anyone or anything. So Iím just going to keep listening, with an open mind. I look forward to the day you're inspired to once again stand during our national anthem. I'll be standing right there next to you."

Empathy and understanding was shown by Mr. Boyer.........and Mr. Kaepernick reciprocated.

Colin invited Nate to San Diego where the two had a 90 minute discussion and Nate proposed Colin kneel instead of sit.

But why kneel? In a military funeral, after the flag is taken off the casket of the fallen military member, it is smartly folded 13 times and then presented to the parents, spouse or child of the fallen member by a fellow service member while KNEELING. The two decided that kneeling for the flag would symbolize his reverence for those that paid the ultimate sacrifice while still allowing Colin to peacefully protest the injustices he saw.

Empathy, not zealotry under the guise of patriotism, is the only way meaningful discussion can be had. Mr. Kaepernick listened to all of you that say he disrespects the military and extended an olive branch to find a peace.

When will America listen to him?

We can all learn from this backstory. The truth often lies in the middle. Seek to learn the opposing side's point.
Logged

Better than yesterday, better yet tomorrow.
Piano man
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Feb 10, 2006
Posts: 10041

View Profile
« Reply #228 on: Sep 29, 2017, 12:05PM »

I'm also a little cynical over the fact that many of these same people support the flying of the Confederate flag. If quietly and passively sitting out the anthem is objectionable, surely it's far worse actively flying a flag against the Stars and Stripes.
Logged

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so." --Mark Twain
Greg Waits
*
*
Offline Offline

Location: Rowlett Texas USA
Joined: Apr 18, 2016
Posts: 884

View Profile WWW
« Reply #229 on: Sep 29, 2017, 12:24PM »

I'm also a little cynical over the fact that many of these same people support the flying of the Confederate flag. If quietly and passively sitting out the anthem is objectionable, surely it's far worse actively flying a flag against the Stars and Stripes.

Exactly. Selective outrage. Knee deep in hypocrisy.
Logged
B0B
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Jun 27, 2008
Posts: 5932

View Profile
« Reply #230 on: Sep 29, 2017, 12:25PM »

This form of protest has given many (mostly Trump supporters) the opportunity to ignore their message and wrap themselves in the flag.  What is the protestors desired outcome, who are they trying to reach, and are they making progress towards their goals?  Yes to some degree they are opening up discussion and discourse, but are the right people talking about it.  The main objective of the Civil Rights movement was to strike down the Jim Crow laws in the south.  They accomplished that goal (with the help of a lot of sympathetic white Baby Boomers, my peers), now we have a different battle to win.  We did the easy part we got the unfair laws abolished, separate but equal is no longer legal.  Now we have the laws and the fight is to change attitudes, will the same tactics that worked then work now?  Maybe they will maybe they won't.  In one of my previous posts I had offered alternatives (you can go back and find it if you look) and those alternatives were all summarily dismissed.  I'm not anti-kneeler I just suspect that the people who need to hear their message the most aren't getting it because of the form of the protest.  Maybe they would just not get it regardless of how the protest was done.  My main point in all of this was really not to attack those kneeling in protest, but to get us thinking about should we be doing something else that might be more productive and reach the people who need to hear the message the most.  I really don't know what the solution is, I'm only one individual with limited resources what we need to build is consensus and solidarity behind the cause, are we doing that?  Are we leaving out some allies in the fight who honestly feel that the kneeling protest is offensive in it's form?  If all we're going to do is talk amongst ourselves about how bad things are and not include those who disagree in the discussion are we going to get anywhere?

Ok, so serious question: Do you actually have any answers or real suggestions to the issues you pose, or is this simply second guessing?

You seem to have an interesting recollection of history... that MLK and his movement were popular - they weren't, just look at his constant arrests and attacks against him. Baby boomers helped it along - actually most of this happened as they were just kids, and it was their parents, not the boomers who were instrumental. That the era of jim crow type laws to restrict rights was won - see the number of adult blacks with felonies, and how many state limit felon voting rights. Even for existing laws such as drug law, see how unevenly they are executed.

Or even... you have a some group of reactionary people who get easily offended and make someone else's protest immediately a personal issue against themselves. And your focus is on how to placate people even you say are unlikely to be reached because of their own preconceived notions?


Ultimately... You can look through history and a few things for sure:
1) People will be upset. People will be offended. People will resist. Those in power/privilege(whites) have nothing to gain by giving up their advantages, nor will they do so readily or easily.  
2) No change will happen without effort.
3) No one has the answers, just ideas of how to try.

#2 & 3 simply means for better or worse... trying... is more likely to do some good then sitting back, second guessing, and not doing anything at all for fear of what might happen.
Logged
Radar

*
Offline Offline

Location: Rochester NY
Joined: Feb 23, 2012
Posts: 763

View Profile
« Reply #231 on: Sep 29, 2017, 02:36PM »

Ok, so serious question: Do you actually have any answers or real suggestions to the issues you pose, or is this simply second guessing?

You seem to have an interesting recollection of history... that MLK and his movement were popular - they weren't, just look at his constant arrests and attacks against him. Baby boomers helped it along - actually most of this happened as they were just kids, and it was their parents, not the boomers who were instrumental. That the era of jim crow type laws to restrict rights was won - see the number of adult blacks with felonies, and how many state limit felon voting rights. Even for existing laws such as drug law, see how unevenly they are executed.

Or even... you have a some group of reactionary people who get easily offended and make someone else's protest immediately a personal issue against themselves. And your focus is on how to placate people even you say are unlikely to be reached because of their own preconceived notions?


Ultimately... You can look through history and a few things for sure:
1) People will be upset. People will be offended. People will resist. Those in power/privilege(whites) have nothing to gain by giving up their advantages, nor will they do so readily or easily.  
2) No change will happen without effort.
3) No one has the answers, just ideas of how to try.

#2 & 3 simply means for better or worse... trying... is more likely to do some good then sitting back, second guessing, and not doing anything at all for fear of what might happen.
Bob, I never said the Civil Rights movement was widely popular it wasn't (you're putting words in my mouth), The baby boom generation starts in 1946, and the height of the Civil Rights movement was the Mid 60s, but it continued into the 70s putting some of the boomers in their late teens and early 20s, the civil rights movement got a lot of support from many younger whites (but I can say the majority of our parents were not fans at all) and you are right there were probably more people marching from the boomers parents generation than the boomers because of their early age (I stand corrected), but there were early boomers involved, and when I was in school in the 60s and 70s myself and most of my peers revered Dr. King and the work he did for civil rights.  I did suggest in a previous post that they could use their celebrity status in a less divisive manner to get there message across, but my suggestion of them  holding press conferences, organizing marches, etc. was shot down by the posters in the thread as being ineffective, so no I don't have additional suggestions!!   
Logged
Russ White

*
Offline Offline

Location: Orange City, Fl
Joined: Feb 27, 2007
Posts: 5274

View Profile
« Reply #232 on: Sep 29, 2017, 04:49PM »

Here's another relevant perspective.....

https://www.facebook.com/NowThisPolitics/videos/1718294461535370/
Logged

Better than yesterday, better yet tomorrow.
bhcordova
Wielder of the Cat Litter Scoop

*
*
Offline Offline

Location: Nacogdoches, TX, USA
Joined: May 18, 2000
Posts: 7208
"Carpe Felix"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #233 on: Sep 29, 2017, 07:33PM »

Bob, I never said the Civil Rights movement was widely popular it wasn't (you're putting words in my mouth), The baby boom generation starts in 1946, and the height of the Civil Rights movement was the Mid 60s, but it continued into the 70s putting some of the boomers in their late teens and early 20s, the civil rights movement got a lot of support from many younger whites (but I can say the majority of our parents were not fans at all) and you are right there were probably more people marching from the boomers parents generation than the boomers because of their early age (I stand corrected), but there were early boomers involved, and when I was in school in the 60s and 70s myself and most of my peers revered Dr. King and the work he did for civil rights.  I did suggest in a previous post that they could use their celebrity status in a less divisive manner to get there message across, but my suggestion of them  holding press conferences, organizing marches, etc. was shot down by the posters in the thread as being ineffective, so no I don't have additional suggestions!!   

The press conferences are ineffective because no one listens to those.  Organizing marches would take more time and effort than a professional athlete would have.
Logged

Billy Cordova, MBA
Forum Administrator
bcordova@tromboneforum.org

Beware the Jabberwock, my son! - Lewis Carroll

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup - Anon.

St. Cecilia, pray for us.
Greg Waits
*
*
Offline Offline

Location: Rowlett Texas USA
Joined: Apr 18, 2016
Posts: 884

View Profile WWW
« Reply #234 on: Sep 29, 2017, 10:29PM »

IMO, the movement is only divisive because the people opposed to it are the ones made uncomfortable by the message. They don't or won't acknowledge that there is a problem with the way blacks are treated by the justice system (mainly law enforcement) and they don't want to deal with it.

There wouldn't be so much bitching and moaning about so-called disrespecting the flag if the message was received for what it is.

It is a legitimate issue, and protesting via news conferences won't get a damn thing done. As was already stated no one listens to those. But a nationally televised event that millions watch? Yes, that gets attention.

The issue is serious. The inequality issue has to be addressed. It won't go away. People (of all colors) are disgusted by the steady stream of incidents when innocent people get shot dead by bad cops who ultimately face zero consequences. It is NOT right and it has to stop.
Logged
Baron von Bone
Fear is the Mind-Killer.

*
Offline Offline

Location: Athens, GA (USA)
Joined: Jul 16, 2002
Posts: 18814
"Reality Junkie"


View Profile
« Reply #235 on: Sep 30, 2017, 07:14AM »

IMO, the movement is only divisive because the people opposed to it are the ones made uncomfortable by the message. They don't or won't acknowledge that there is a problem with the way blacks are treated by the justice system (mainly law enforcement) and they don't want to deal with it.
 
There wouldn't be so much bitching and moaning about so-called disrespecting the flag if the message was received for what it is.
 
It is a legitimate issue, and protesting via news conferences won't get a damn thing done. As was already stated no one listens to those. But a nationally televised event that millions watch? Yes, that gets attention.
 
The issue is serious. The inequality issue has to be addressed. It won't go away. People (of all colors) are disgusted by the steady stream of incidents when innocent people get shot dead by bad cops who ultimately face zero consequences. It is NOT right and it has to stop.

There's also a huge form over substance issue behind it all--people who revere symbols often without even understanding the principles behind them , at all. It's just a very important part of their identity and that of their chosen community. So it's very deeply personal, but they don't have much if any sense of it any further or other than that. So all this talk about the principles behind the symbol are effectively meaningless to such types. Radar's raised some valid issues to factor in on the semi-anti side (he's very clear in that he supports the actual cause and that he's well aware of the principles behind the symbol, but that he's also very invested in the symbol itself and takes using it for demonstration purposes a bit personally. I get the sense he's kind of on the edge of the anti-world and mostly in favor of the protestors personally, just not real happy with their methods.
 
The former types need to be understood better, but yeah, that mindset is quite a problem--it's the depraved My Country Right or Wrong and there's a strange notion that correcting flaws requires criticism and criticism is anti- and hateful, and of course you have to acknowledge flaws, which is betrayal, so protesting anything accepted as 'Murcan by this group is on the spectrum of treason. This is an incredibly foolish mentality. The Radars out there are a whole different animal though, and hopefully at least as large a group as the Deplorables. An adult conversation can happen with the Radar types, and we can even learn from each other and get along. Seems to my recollection, which may be off, the Radar types are more like what conservatives used to be when our society was far more functional--a solid part of the mix that made it all work.
 
Form over substance does seem to be a pretty good litmus test to parse rational, honorable conservatives from The Deplorables. It's very important we do this, because rational, honorable conservatives may be the only translators The Deplorables are capable of actually hearing.
Logged

- Feeding a troll just gives it a platform and amplifies its voice.
 
- Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves.  - Richard Feynman
- He who knows not and knows not that he knows not is a fool.   - Confucius
Andrew Meronek

*
Offline Offline

Location: Livonia, MI
Joined: Sep 30, 2001
Posts: 7000
"Justly Intoned"


View Profile
« Reply #236 on: Sep 30, 2017, 11:38AM »

see the number of adult blacks with felonies, and how many state limit felon voting rights.

I don't generally get too involved in politics, but this is one that to me seems blatantly and obviously terrible. No criminal prosecution should be able to take away someone's voting rights. The vote is one of the few ways we have on making sure that the definition of a "felon" doesn't expand over time to become a tool of oppression.
Logged

"All musicians are subconsciously mathematicians."

- Thelonious Monk
Blowero

*
Offline Offline

Location: Southern California
Joined: Nov 1, 2006
Posts: 1798

View Profile WWW
« Reply #237 on: Sep 30, 2017, 01:12PM »

"The way I see it, unless we each conform, unless we obey orders, unless we follow our leaders blindly, there is no possible way we can remain free."

-Frank Burns
Logged

Brass repair, modifications, custom parts and instruments

http://brassmedic.com
badger

*
Offline Offline

Location: Permian Basin
Joined: Sep 27, 2010
Posts: 1300

View Profile
« Reply #238 on: Sep 30, 2017, 07:20PM »

Enough of the Tomfoolery.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKCVS57j284

 Good!
Logged
Piano man
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Feb 10, 2006
Posts: 10041

View Profile
« Reply #239 on: Sep 30, 2017, 07:38PM »


That's impressive!
Logged

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so." --Mark Twain
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15   Go Up
Print
Jump to: