"Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than the absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will." - Martin Luther King, Jr.Penned from a jail cell in Birmingham, Alabama, Dr. King's reply to fellow clergy posed to him in correspondence in regards to his protests in that town was a visceral beatdown of the the leaders of the churches who found the protests to be ill-timed, and that he should be content to let time bring about change.
King's response to the clergy, who were predominantly Caucasian, meant that while he appreciated their concern for his well being, as men of the cloth they should have a greater understanding of the premise behind the protests - which had become convoluted by the fact that he was considered an outside agitator by a loud majority of the residents, who cared neither for King nor his message...
...a message that became lost not only amid the hateful diatribe of the ill-meaning gentry, but also the well-meaning but insensitive pleading of the white clergy.
To King, it was more frustrating that the people who preached love and understanding had very little understanding that time had cured little in the struggle for civil rights - and that he had more patience for people whom he knew opposed him with hatred.
Why? Simply because he knew the agenda of the opposition, but wasn't so sure he could count on the people he should be able to. In other words, at least he could count on the the people who hated his message to be consistent in their hatred, and to understand his message, even though they didn't agree with it.
This same attitude has come into question with me as I watched NFL Players and owners display varying degrees of amplitude in their reply to inappropriate statements made by President Donald Trump in Huntsville, a straight hour-and-a-half iron shot north of Birmingham, during a rally for republican senate candidate Luther Strange.
Trump is a hated man for many, and is seen as an agitator to many, but the similarities to Dr. King begin and end right there. His statements seem to bring out the hatred in those who oppose him just as fiercely as those who opposed King, yet there seems to be no rhyme nor reason nor any direction to the loose cannon in the White House, where King's message was always pointed and consistent.
His statement regarding players who "disrespect the flag" by kneeling during the national anthem should be fired by the teams that employ them was uneven, detatched and unrealistic - and in turn caused a response that would have warmed King's heart because he understood the intent, but would have caused him to be frustrated with them.
The message has become lost, and the protests are now inspired by hatred for a man who is almost criminally loquacious rather than being inspired by racial inequality.
When Colin Kaepernick first knelt during the anthem on the sidelines of the San Francisco 49ers, his message was that he couldn't stand to pay homage to a flag and anthem of a nation that oppressed people of color, and one that subjected them to more forceful punishments - sometimes completely unwarranted - than what white folks would receive.
For that, Kaepernick divided a nation of football fans, and at the same time spurred protests that spiraled into the maw of ambiguity - because Kaepernick himself is no leader. People who start movements are guided by people who have staunch beliefs and a clear message, not by a person who preaches civil rights then parades around in garb edifying persons who were some of the most violent civil rights violators in history.
Kaepernick is confused, as is Trump. They both head off on tangents that stir the coals of unrest, yet their message is inconsistent and dangerous.
The movement that Kaepernick no doubt feels very strongly about is based on the shallow understanding of people who agree with his message, while his opposition is based on people with the same shallow understanding. Both grasp at straws and use the words of leaders past for their own agenda, but the truth of the matter is that neither the movement nor the opposition have the leadership to further the cause.
So disjointed is the cause that every NFL team this past weekend hurriedly prepared statements denouncing Trump's impromptu and off-the-cuff remarks, then held protests either before or after the national anthem to show that the players and management of their organizations were unified in their resolve - but the unification came as a response to Trump, not to the original message.
That is a vital point that all of us are failing to understand, or at least have a shallow understanding of.
We want our citizens to be able to protest, but we set conditions on what is acceptable and what is not. We want our President to be clear-headed and impartial, but we set conditions on what those things mean. We want everyone to have rights as stated in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but lawyers and politicians have diluted the interpretation of those rights to the point where we have a Bill of Accommodations instead.
To many, football is a sacred institution.
The game has evolved with the times, but never since President Teddy Roosevelt threatened to ban the game due to it's violent nature and seeming disregard for human life has it faced a crisis in which it is engaged today.
On Sunday, we all witnessed a coming together of a group of athletes to demonstrate unity in the wake of remarks made by current President Donald Trump regarding the practice of kneeling during the playing of the National Anthem - their response to his comments igniting a firestorm of visceral opinion among fans.
Which is fine on one hand, as it gave people a reason to regurgitate their feelings towards the President, but is wrong on the other hand because it is impacting the purity of a sport with political subterfuge.
The place for protest isn't on the sidelines of an NFL game. The place for protest isn't on the stage at the Emmy's or Grammy's. It isn't on stage at a popular Broadway musical and it's not at rally's for political candidates - or maybe it is, and an outside entity makes us have to tolerate it as part of the subculture.
Even that isn't clear. The impetus for any of these things are fear and the hate that fear produces. But that fear is exasperated by a media that can't get enough of either, because both sell magazines, newspapers and ad space - and it's all must-read and must-see until it involves you, then it's fodder for protest and anger.
Like Stephen King once said, It stops being funny when it starts being you.
All of us have faced or will face an issue in our lives that we feel strongly about. There is no doubt that people who take the time to protest are motivated to do so - but where that motivation comes from is where we run into problems like the one dividing the nation today.
As a veteran, I served my country not because I felt an obligation as an American, and not because I'm any more patriotic than anyone else and not because my father served - I did so because a TV ad told me that I could be all I could be. I'm proud of my service, but I had an agenda, an agenda to make a better life for myself.
Is that the agenda that Kaepernick has? To make a better life for himself and for people of color, or did he just get a wild hair one day, got caught on TV and then improvised himself into a great divider? Did Trump run for President because he wanted a better life for all Americans, or did he pull a publicity stunt that gained steam until he found himself as a serious contender for the office?
As always, there's two sides of the story and the truth is probably in the middle somewhere - but it doesn't matter because all these two have done is politicize things that should have been left well enough alone, and forced their agendas onto our national consciousness.
I would never disrespect the flag, nor would I kneel during the national anthem - I don't feel strongly enough about that either way to really care if anyone else does - but what I do care about is that we live in a country that I feel is the land of opportunity for everyone, but that had been diluted by special interests that the aforementioned "Bill of Accommodations" has usurped what our forefathers intended for our rights to be.
Everyone wants more than the next guy. When one group wins special treatment, the next group wonders why they don't get the same, and then the next group, and then the next, and before you know it, fights and protests break out and people start hating each other because they haven't been accommodated to the extent of others.
And that is the issue. It's not a President that can't keep his hands off his twitter handle. It's not a football quarterback that contradicts himself and confuses people. It's because people want what you have, and if they don't get it, they protest, which causes people to take sides, which causes turmoil, which causes people to get all bent out of shape, which causes hate.
I'm not suggesting that people shouldn't want what other people have, I'm simply suggesting that if one feels that strongly about it, they live in a country that affords everyone that opportunity through hard work and dedication, that they can be all they can be if they dedicate themselves to be so. To earn something is what we are given the opportunity for, and there's really no better feeling in the world.
And if that's what people are protesting by kneeling during the national anthem, then we have identified what exactly is wrong with the country today.
If someone else doesn't want you to have what they have, then you know their agenda. They can't stop you from striving for what they have, though they have demonstrated their misunderstanding from ill will, in which case, at least you know where you stand with them.
But as Dr. King said in his letter from decades ago, frustration comes from the shallow understanding of the issue at hand, and that's what has happened with the Country in the wake of this past weekend's war of words - the message has gotten lost - or at least diluted. It's now about politics, and there's no room for that.
The NFL teams may be united in their stance, but this has nothing to do with racial equality. The NFL and it's employees are united against someone calling them "Sons of bitches" - and very few of these players or owners cared enough to kneel before Trump opened his mouth...
...nor until the media egged them on.
Since when did football players get such thin skin, anyway?
No comments:
Post a Comment