Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 435

oojason said:

chyron8472 said:

Personally, I think a football player sitting during the anthem is ineffectual. It’s less effective even than temporarily adding an overlay to your Facebook avatar after a crisis.

If the people who sit want to help the cause for which they protest, they should do so in a way that matters. You can’t show solidarity to the BLM community by sitting unless the camera notices you doing it and the media jumps up and down accordingly. So I think the people who sit should be ignored, because it deflates their method of protest entirely.

It’s similar to how Trump wouldn’t have won the primary had he not been given all the media attention. Just ignore them, and their opinion becomes moot.

A player sitting during the anthem is so ineffectual you think the media should ignore it (instead of jumping up and down accordingly) - so it will deflate their method of protest entirely?

Erm… what?

His argument is that if people and the media stop making a big deal out of it, they will eventually stop protesting the anthem and move on to some other sort of protest.

chyron8472 said:

It is ineffectual at helping the cause. If someone sees him sit, they don’t consider the legitimacy of why or make any appreciable change on his behalf. They argue about whether he should be allowed to sit, effectively bringing attention to only himself and not why he sat.

yep.

So people should ignore him and make his decision ineffective at drawing attention. Then, he either can keep sitting but no one knows so no one cares; do something that actually helps the cause; or quit bothering altogether. Albeit given that two of those options would have the same effect since no one is paying attention to him.

I know one thing Kaepernick could do to help his cause that he didn’t do in 2016: vote in elections.

chyron8472 said:

Jeebus said:

chyron8472 said:

Personally, I think a football player sitting during the anthem is ineffectual. It’s less effective even than temporarily adding an overlay to your Facebook avatar after a crisis.

We’re talking about it though, I’d say they were pretty successful.

We’re talking about him sitting. We’re not talking much about police brutality. Case in point.

I talked about it. It’s you guys (mostly Warb) who would rather complain about someone sitting down during a song.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Warbler said:

I know one thing Kaepernick could do to help his cause that he didn’t do in 2016: vote in elections.

I agree with this. Although you could argue that police brutality has gotten more attention due to his sitting than his one vote would have gotten it.

CatBus said:

oojason said:

chyron8472 said:

Personally, I think a football player sitting during the anthem is ineffectual. It’s less effective even than temporarily adding an overlay to your Facebook avatar after a crisis.

If the people who sit want to help the cause for which they protest, they should do so in a way that matters. You can’t show solidarity to the BLM community by sitting unless the camera notices you doing it and the media jumps up and down accordingly. So I think the people who sit should be ignored, because it deflates their method of protest entirely.

It’s similar to how Trump wouldn’t have won the primary had he not been given all the media attention. Just ignore them, and their opinion becomes moot.

A player sitting during the anthem is so ineffectual you think the media should ignore it (instead of jumping up and down accordingly) - so it will deflate their method of protest entirely?

Erm… what?

Well, I’ve been trying to stay out of this one so far, but I think I can translate. I think he’s saying it’s ineffectual in that it doesn’t communicate the message you’re trying to send, not that it doesn’t successfully grab media attention. i.e. the media ruckus becomes about sitting and flags and whatnot, and not about your actual grievances, therefore it’s ineffectual.

I haven’t actually formed an opinion on the concept of media grabbing yet. It does seem to be central to the “Stay Woke” thesis – that unless your reminders that racism and brutality exists are adequately loud and outrageous, your protests will eventually turn into background noise and the media (and therefore the majority) will tune them out, fall back into a slumber, and think everything must be fine now. BLM has embraced this and while they’ve clearly gotten some backlash, the media’s focus on police racism and brutality has definitely been longer and more critical recently than during any recent prior protest movement, and I’d say police racism and brutality is actually much less prevalent today than in the years past when it was barely covered at all. So did BLM succeed with confrontational protest tactics? Or is it the fact that almost every citizen carries around a video camera these days and stuff can’t be explained away as easily as it used to? Or a combination. I really don’t know.

The thing I can’t stand about BLM is how the facts don’t seem to matter. They hear about a white cop shooting a black person, and automatically assume it must be racism and the shooting must be unjustified. No looking at the facts, no reasonable doubt. The cop is guilty until proven innocent in their eyes.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron8472 said:

Jeebus said:

chyron8472 said:

Personally, I think a football player sitting during the anthem is ineffectual. It’s less effective even than temporarily adding an overlay to your Facebook avatar after a crisis.

We’re talking about it though, I’d say they were pretty successful.

We’re talking about him sitting. We’re not talking much about police brutality. Case in point.

I talked about it. It’s you guys (mostly Warb) who would rather complain about someone sitting down during a song.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

When he tries to get attention for his cause by doing something shitty, it is not going to make me care much for his cause. Besides, I am not the one they are trying to reach. I am just me. I have no power. I have no authority over the cops. Most of the time I vote more liberal anyway.

and you know it is not just a “*song*”.

“I don’t care that black people are disproportionately targeted by the police because a football player sat down during a song!”

…is what I just read.

Dammit I swore I wasn’t going to stay involved in this Groundhog Day’s argument. No more.

I reworded my post while you were posting that.

TV’s Frink said:

Dammit I swore I wasn’t going to stay involved in this Groundhog Day’s argument. No more.

Maybe we have to repeat the Groundhog Day’s argument, until we come to an understanding and then we will be allowed to move onto the next day.

Warbler said:

I reworded my post while you were posting that.

Looks pretty much the same to me but ok.

If you were trying to get Muslims to care about your cause, would the first thing you do to get their attention be to burn the Koran? Think that would inspire them to join your cause?

chyron8472 said:

I definitely do not agree that The Star-Spangled Banner should be relegated to merely a song.

?

Warbler said:

chyron8472 said:

I definitely do not agree that The Star-Spangled Banner should be relegated to merely a song.

You’re not seeing the Citizen Kane clapping pic here?

oojason said:

chyron8472 said:

Warbler said:

oojason said:

chyron8472 said:

Personally, I think a football player sitting during the anthem is ineffectual. It’s less effective even than temporarily adding an overlay to your Facebook avatar after a crisis.

If the people who sit want to help the cause for which they protest, they should do so in a way that matters. You can’t show solidarity to the BLM community by sitting unless the camera notices you doing it and the media jumps up and down accordingly. So I think the people who sit should be ignored, because it deflates their method of protest entirely.

It’s similar to how Trump wouldn’t have won the primary had he not been given all the media attention. Just ignore them, and their opinion becomes moot.

A player sitting during the anthem is so ineffectual you think the media should ignore it (instead of jumping up and down accordingly) - so it will deflate their method of protest entirely?

Erm… what?

His argument is that if people and the media stop making a big deal out of it, they will eventually stop protesting the anthem and move on to some other sort of protest.

Yes.

No, the protesters likely won’t - or shouldn’t stop protesting during the anthem - they should keep on whether the media report/censor/ignore it or not - though they may take other different forms of protest too. Media suppression of an incident can help that protest in itself.

We on here may be talking about the sitting thing in the main - but I hadn’t really a clue about any of it (from the UK, not an NFL fan) - did a little research and now I know the reasons why, and researched it further - others will likely do (or have already) the same… and the point of the protest is made.

Others, especially those around the world (that are allowed to do so) have no qualms protesting against symbols of their own Govt or country when it is failing it’s citizens, or there is an inequality perceived to be taking place with no-little appetite for change.

The raising of awareness for a cause is one of the first and most important steps in the long, slow and difficult road to implementing change. Media suppression or censorship certainly does not help that.

Yes.