NFL, kneeling and division or unity
Mas has been around for a lot longer than recorded history. The belief that unity is strength is so strong in all cultures, excommunications are seen as the harshest punishment. However, it is common for a largely unifying factor to lead to division and miss the target. Similarly, what may seem to be a divisive matter can actually unite the group. In these cases, society becomes engulfed in endless debates as it tries to defend, negate or redefine the issue at hand. This is one of many controversial topics that can lead to division or unity in the society. This paper critically analyzes the controversy surrounding the National Footbaly League’s (NFL) kneeling (and some players sitting) during the National anthem, to reveal the unity or division that is associated with it.
Colin Kaepernick was the first to kneel during the National Anthem in protest of alleged police brutality towards black men. Kaepernick, a former San Francisco 49ers quarterback, criticized the alleged police brutality against black men by refusing to stand up for the national anthem. President Donald Trump took Kaepernick’s refusal to stand as an act of racial prejudice. Trump then ordered managers to dismiss players who did no stand during national anthem[2], a move that gave the protest greater traction. There is a growing controversy as more players choose to “take the knee” NFL and sponsors, footballers and administration are the most concerned parties. As individuals can be motivated to act in certain ways when they are in a large group, it is difficult to draw a line between the act and a factor that unites or divides. But a critical look from both sides could provide valuable insight.
Kneeling during the National Anthem has exacerbated the divisions in society. Kaepernick can justify his protest as a way to voice his grievances. However, now that the protest has a wider audience involved, its impact is greater than just he individual. According to various sources, the controversy has increased polarization[3]. The society will differ in its views on the legality. In some cases, standing during the national song can be seen as disrespectful to the country[4]. The disciplined officer and many others who think that standing up during the anthem displays respect for the nation would hold this opinion. These individuals would support all actions to protect the country from disrespect. Some would consider it acceptable, because kneeling also represents reverence, or they think that Kaepernick, or anyone else, has the right decide whether to act or not to act in order to maintain their dignity. This division, if left unchecked would cause social disorder and affect the unity of our nation.
The managers of teams are also caught in a conflict, unsure whether they should follow the president’s directive or keep their best players. No matter what decision the team managers make, they will still have divisions within their teams. This is why no player has ever been fired[5]. When multiple players stand together to support a fellow player, it is difficult to send them away. This puts the team’s operations at risk, and huge resources are involved. The civil society could be slapped on the neck of any team who dumps an uncooperative player. Some players follow Kaepernick and others Trump. When a close teammate is criticized by the player who has chosen to kneel, and then decides not to stand, it can create contempt. This slowly escalates hut emotions and seriously threatens team unity.
It is evident that there are divisions between NFL sponsors. Others feel NFL and kneeling is not responsible for the negative impact on their sales. Shareholders are the ones who suffer the impact. Papa John’s, as an example, blames the drop in sales of their pizzas on customers’ negative perceptions of NFS. Buffalo Wild Wings Inc., for example, sees an opportunity and will advertise chicken with NFL. They claim that “we can see that a lot our customers and potential shoppers are watching NFL”. During this debate, there is disagreement in the community about whether the actions of NFL players are damaging to the NFL image. This would answer the question as to whether NFL should take responsibility for the losses of shareholders.
The divisions among legislators and in the entire legal profession are important. Others argue that kneeling people deserve to be heard. In such a situation, advocates interpret the constitution according to their personal interests. Discussions take the form that gun laws are against gun rights. Attorneys in favor of kneeling quickly point out how Americans view the flag, whereas their counterparts consider the act illegal no matter the reason. The difference is due to the differing schools of thinking and how each defines right and incorrect. American citizens are caught between two opposing views, while others feel underrepresented by their elected lawmakers who take a differing stance. John Schnatter made a statement which has been misinterpreted many times. He said the controversy “should’ve been stopped a year ago and a quarter” Overall, kneeling for the national anthem has divided the American public.
Kneeling can be seen as a way to bring people together. To start with, you should know that NFL participants come from different races. People of all backgrounds unite when faced with adversity. Kaepernick, who is black, does the unimaginable by linking police brutality with racial injustice. The president’s response is to instruct owners of sports teams to fire any players who kneel during the National Anthem. Payers in different teams protest Trump’s order. In response, many players kneel during the National Anthem and others sit. This shows how the act united footballers to peacefully demonstrate against racial profile. According to other sources, Kaepernick’s protest was against police brutality. The current kneeling, however, is in opposition to social injustices. This includes the directive Trump gave players about being fired. The controversy allows the minority to express themselves and unite.
The act also united the parties in their quest for better government. Even though there are differences, all parties involved work towards a good government, even if they have differing viewpoints. It is not only polarization that will be the end result of a controversial issue, but also some stronger ties. The NFL, for example, is divided but its continuity reveals a strength that proves society can remain united despite the different viewpoints. Since the incident, civil society groups are now advocating cohesion within the nation in order to bridge the racial gap[9], something they did not do before. When handled properly, actions that may initially appear divisive could actually bring people together. Once the players have felt that they are heard, one individual will be responsible for restoring standing. It would be a sign that the grievances of the players have been addressed, and society would become more united.
In summary, the NFL controversy has caused significant divisions. In the NFL, NFL sponsors, NFL administrators, lawmakers, football teams themselves, and society as a whole, there is polarization. The controversy has brought footballers together and could potentially bring the entire society together. The fact that the players have taken a knee as a whole has motivated them and will help to improve society.
