Where is this all going? That’s the question I find myself asking in response to the rapid spread of Kaepernick-inspired protests across the NFL. Over the past two weeks, every single team has shown its unity in one form or another. The recent instigator for this surge in demonstrations was, of course, President Donald Trump tweeting criticism of players kneeling for the national anthem. While it comes as no surprise that Trump made people angry by tweeting, the scope of displays in response to his tweets, which called on NFL owners to fire players who took a knee during the anthem, is impressive. Yet while the demonstrations made an impact through their sheer quantity, the meaning behind those actions isn’t so clear.
When Colin Kaepernick first sat during the national anthem, he wanted to draw attention to racism. More specifically, he sought to highlight police brutality amid a spate of public and disturbing deaths of black people at the hands of police. (Whether or not these deaths qualify as murders I leave for you to decide.) His personal protest proved successful by galvanizing support from across the country, including a few other NFL players. He never, however, offered specific standards for what change he was looking for. When it was mostly him protesting on his own, that was okay. He didn’t have the leverage by himself to catalyze change. But now his call to action has caught on, and the lack of a detailed plan might derail these protests even as they grow in number.
The best protest movements combine high-minded ideals with concrete demands. When preaching about the Montgomery Bus Boycott, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. spoke of exercising his right as a citizen in a democracy and protesting to fight for freedom and justice. Beyond touting those virtues, he recognized that the mechanics of the protest were just as important as the values behind it. The boycott had specific objectives, calling on all citizens to not ride the buses until the bus company agreed to dismantle its racist seating restrictions. (If my history is a little shaky please forgive me; I’m only one week into my MLK class.) Kaepernick spoke only to the ideal of resisting oppression, not to the specific resolutions he wanted or the plan for how to get there. As a result, his movement has grown to include people who might not align fully with his values.
The more unwieldly the mobilized player movement becomes, the less likely it is to accomplish anything concrete. News headlines like to claim that all teams protested in some fashion over the last two weeks. Those so-called protests, though, were often not protests of police brutality but rather signs of unity. For many teams, that exhibit took the form of locking arms or simply waiting out the anthem in the locker room. Those teams emphasized how everyone on the team supported one another. That’s great! I’m a fan of togetherness. The thing is, teammates supporting one another doesn’t directly relate to protesting racism. It is easy for every team and many owners, some of them Trump donors, to take part in these demonstrations because their purpose is so vague. Even the players who acknowledge the racial injustice-motivated component of their protests don’t or can’t say what exactly they hope to have happen. With a lack of direction, I don’t see these protests leading to the type of change Kaepernick wanted.
Now, someone might argue that there’s nothing wrong with lacking a well developed plan. “We want athletes to use their platform to call attention to issues,” one might say, “not to figure out the policy solutions to the issues themselves.” That’s a good point. I agree that it’s unfair to expect NFL players to have the time to write up policy papers on racist policies. I don’t mean to say that these players must come up with all the answers and know every step of the process to accomplish their goals. The point I want to make is that if these players don’t start to outline the intent of their protests in as precise terms as they can, the ideal behind their stance fades from the spotlight. Their critics get to hijack their movement.
If you look at the discussion around these protests today, most of it centers around the value of free speech. In an age of ever-widening political polarization, freedom of speech merits discussion. But that’s not the topic Kap was trying to bring up. That’s not what this movement was supposed to be about.
It’s not too late for players to regain control of their movement. They still can offer specific proposals or demands. The NFL is taking fire from many sides right now, with one if its biggest agitators being the medical community. Football, we have learned, is really, really bad for the brain. With the NFL relying on its players to continually sacrifice their well-being for its multi-billion-dollar product, the players always have potential leverage. Because NFL teams are so big, and salaries so rarely offer guaranteed money, it’s easy for a team to cut a player that is causing a “distraction.” What’s less easy is for a team to cut all its players. The current player movement has failed to create change, but it has succeeded in drawing in a huge population. With their strength in numbers, these players have a real opportunity to fight for justice. I hope they take advantage of it.
Contact Jack Golub at golubj ‘at’ stanford.edu.