Colin Kaepernick protests anthem due to treatment of minorities

Whatever wall @JayGoogle is batting these excellent points against seems durable, but dull. He'll be a hell of a tennis player if he keeps this up.

 

Here's an essay I rather liked.

https://thejesuitpost.org/2018/09/goodbye-nike-goodbye-kaepernick/

It resonates with my sense that Nike is in no way noble, even for those of us who may agree that Kap had every right to take a knee. It is simply a calculation, and I'll remain very skeptical of cause marketing from for-profit entities, especially those with dubious labor records.

 

good article. I had sort of a similar conversation with my wife about this.

here's a question: any thought about the propriety/ethics of Kapernick profiting and/or otherwise "cashing in" on the police brutality cause in the first place? one could argue (perhaps, I'm not sure about this) that Kapernick is in effect making money off of the lives of youths killed at the hands of police. (To Nike's credit, I understand they are donating money to one of Kapernick's foundations to do . . . something or other. The details are a bit unclear to me).

But curious about the money making --> police brutality --> lives lost connection(s)

 

Yeah, you can certainly argue that after his football carer failed he's profiting off of the bad life choices of young criminals. Even better, there's nothing that is going to stop young criminals from making bad life choices so he'll always have a "cause" and can keep profiting off of them.

 

Yeah, I don't find a speed bump there, even though I see what you're saying. Whatever money he takes from Nike is not promoting further brutality or even deaths at the hands of police. I think the more incriminating link is that, if he takes Nike money and helps promote their brand, he has a hand in supporting dubious international labor practices directly and in real time.

 

And see, I've read this article, it would have been easy to actually read this article and present it before me since it has actual data...but some of us don't like to read and would rather repeat a tired talking point over and over again thinking that the more it is said the truer it becomes.

The article basically gives a bunch of reasons as to why black people vote the way they do, and none of them have anything to do with apparent mind-control and basically summarizes into "Democrats support civil rights efforts, Republicans don't."

As for social pressure, there's social pressure for everything. There's social pressure to be a conservative, there is social pressure to be a Rocket fan if you live in Houston. In the example I stated about Kanye West, some people thought John Legend was applying social pressure when he was simply having a discussion with the man. If I say "I'm a conservative" and someone goes "You disagree with that, but I still accept you as family." does that qualify? Because this is what people think of as social pressure. I've been waiting for the long list of examples of black people being outcast because they are conservative.

I can listen to your spin for days and it wouldn't give me any valid insight into the issue. What I've personally witnessed and accounts by people I know such as friends or family members that don't have an agenda as you do are infinitely more valid, especially since...I'm black, so I guarantee I know more black people than you. You can pretend that there is pressure on black people to stay on the 'Democratic party plantation', but I know for a fact that there isn't.

It's easy to return when the ball is placed in the same spot over and over again...

I'm starting to understand after all this time why so many people have him on ignore.

 

There was definitely dialogue at a legislative level about police brutality, training as well as aa aggression. All 3 are legit issues. Now its affected the empathy of actual cops who's story no one wants to hear because its back in f the po po mode.

My point is ... without diplomacy there wont be change. Mandela. MLK. All diplomatic in how they went about business. Kneeling during an anthem at work is NOT activism. Its lazy, it's no channel for change, and it hasn't opened up any dialogue between him and the racist cops, where even the aa cops cant stand him.

Start an organization, have educated blacks on it, make formal connections. Ali did this as a popular campus speaker, rational and thorough, during the war. Anthem kneeling and nike ads are just hype and his stupidity is hurting progress.

 

SMH, when you are just going to lie, there's no point in talking to you. I know you are lying, you know you are lying, everyone knows you are lying. Honestly it's just pathetic. Acting like there is not pressure on black people to support certain political parties is probably the most ridiculous thing I've seen on these boards and that's really saying something. You might think that it is some kind of black person secret, but everyone knows so there's no reason to lie about it.

 

I got a hold of the APSR article as well, I'm going to try and read it this afternoon.

 

The thing is, all of this is happening?

It's not like the only thing being done about it is kneeling. People are and have been working on the local levels it's just not something that gets talked about.

The kneeling is what gets mentioned...and that's because of the president and others have politicized it. Trump is the reason Kap is even relevant at this point, otherwise no one would have cared, the kneeling would have stopped (because no one would have cared) and people would still be talking about the criminal justice issues.

SMH, when you are just going to lie, there's no point in talking to you. I know you are lying, you know you are lying, everyone knows you are lying. Honestly it's just pathetic. Acting like there is pressure on black people to support certain political parties is probably the most ridiculous thing I've seen on these boards and that's really saying something. You might think that it is some kind of black person secret, but everyone knows there isn't so there's no reason to lie about it.

 

so wait, I'm confused. That article from American Political Science Review has a section on social pressure:

Social Pressure in Political Choices

There has been a recent resurgence in the idea that
social pressure can have an important influence on
mass political behavior. Some recent studies of voter
turnout, for example, have focused on how social pres-
sure in the form of shaming can influence an individ-
ual’s probability of voting. Consider Gerber, Green,
and Larimer’s (2008) demonstration that threatening
to publicize a citizen’s turnout record to their neigh-
bors can increase turnout. In other words, some people
are more likely to participate when they are made to
believe that their behavior is likely to be observed by
close others. This type of effect has been replicated
over a number of studies and supports the general idea
that “shaming” is an effective tool for shaping political
behavior (Gerber, Green, and Larimer 2010).

This concept of shaming is quite similar to the idea
of “reputational sanctions” that has permeated under-
standings of black collective action. Chong (1991), for
example, invoked the concept to explain why individ-
ual African Americans would choose to participate
in the civil rights movement, given that they likely
realized that their participation was not a necessary
condition for them to enjoy any benefits of the move-
ment. Chong argued that activists valued not being
seen by their peers as free-riders; thus they adhered
to group expectations of political participation. It is
this idea that reputational sanctions have the power
to shape group members’ behavior, even when the
behavior in question comes with known risk of real
cost to the individual, that is important in explain-
ing group politics. And within the black community,
notions of punishment—social sanctions for defection
from norms of the group interest—are tangible enough
that terminology for such sanctions is found in political
discourse through the use of the “Uncle Tom” or “sell-
out” epithets. In other words, these terms are linguistic
evidence of reputational sanctions for group members’
political defection (Starkey 2012). In the realm of con-
temporary politics, blacks who espouse conservative
and Republican political agendas, including both ordi-
nary citizens and public figures such as Justice Clarence
Thomas, Herman Cain, and Allen West, often incur the
“sellout” characterization, suggesting that the social
enforcement of racial group-based political norms is
an enduring feature of black politics.
​

So does that social pressure occur? or is its significance overstated or overblown?

 

Social pressure exists in nearly everything, especially when it comes to the other side. So yes, it is overstated and overblown, I think the article you linked makes a great case for how it is so by showing how blacks vote according to the actual issues. When you poll them on issues, then when you compare which parties support these issues, well, there you go.

The article you linked suggests this but it doesn't ignore what @Bobbythegreat ignores. That there are real tangible reasons as to why black people vote democrat other than 'social pressure'

Would you agree or disagree with that?

You would then need to prove that enough blacks are voting Democrat because of social pressure and not other reasons.

The abstract of this study even says that black people must choose between individual self-interest vs group self-interest, the article you linked said that when both parties

 

Please owners of GT350s, don't burn your car. Just donate it to me .

 

Definitely. But even having read through to the discussion and conclusion sections, the authors write:

Our results, then, are consistent
with narratives that warn of “selling out” the interest
of blacks, which depend on a reality that some blacks
are willing to accept private incentives to defect from
group norms of political behavior. Yet, we also ob-
served that not all blacks were equally vulnerable to
such incentives. The willingness to defect depended
importantly on internalized values, with those blacks
who had internalized a strong attachment to money
being most willing to trade a small personal gain for
the group’s larger interest, and those blacks who had
internalized beliefs in the importance of maintaining
racial group solidarity being least vulnerable to the self-
interest incentive.​

I think it's fairly obvious that it's risky to generalize on this and other topics; on the other hand it would seem one could pursue the next line of study here and try to figure out what percentage of the black population (either in one geographic region or nationally) is in group A ("blacks who had internalized a strong attachment to money being most willing to trade a small personal gain for the group’s larger interest") and what percentage is in group B ("blacks who had internalized beliefs in the importance of maintaining racial group solidarity being least vulnerable to the self-interest incentive").

I think on the first statement one could design a study to get at specific motivations for voting Democrat, either because of social pressure or those other reasons.

Still processing the article, however, so not sure any of this is firm

 

Trumptards are gonna be walking to rallies w/holes in their clothes at this point, how fitting.

 

I couldn't find the link to the article or study but it looks like you're going through it well enough.

I bolded that part because it is important to me.

Saying that black people vote this way or that way because they are selling out or part of some plantation effect is both harmful and I've said as much that calling someone Uncle Tom is equally reprehensible to the Plantation narrative. Both are social shaming, the former is just the conservative version of it. I'm just not sure how much of an effect that has on what someone will do when voting since that's private anyway. From personal experience, I've never seen anyone outcast from family or social circles for being conservative. I've told the story before, my dad voted for Trump. No one cared, we laughed about it, joked about it, moved on. I have a cousin at a cookout that basically went on a long anti-clinton rant...no fights, no one cared. I argued with him about it, that's about it. No one outcast the man and from my experience once again a lot of black conservatives carry this chip on their shoulder that if you do disagree with them that they are being 'persecuted' when they are simply being disagreed with.

I find issue with the plantation thing because it suggests that Conservatives shouldn't do anything to work for that voting bloc and that there are no reasons, realistic reasons, as to why black people vote democrat.

If you replace 'Black' with any other demographic group people are more willing to discuss the actual reasons. Why does the LGBT community vote democrat? Why do Evangelicals vote republican? Why do white women vote more often democrat? If you ask these questions most people on both sides will have a discussion about the topic...

But if you say "Why do blacks vote blue" you'll hear little discussions as to why it actually is and more "Well, they just do..." thus it then becomes easy to ignore the actual issues on the table.

I think you could make a study asking people if they have been the victim of such social pressure and then ask who they voted for in previous elections.

I think you'd have to define social pressure, such as 'Uncle Tom' and social shaming. I don't think disagreements are social pressure and I feel, especially after that whole Kanye thing, many people feel disagreeing is social pressure.

 

Honestly, not worth discussing how Nike is part of the problem. In 2018, either you know and don't care, know and don't mind or know and mind. I wouldn't be revealing anything you don't know.

What he did is certainly a good thing for brands, and empowers them in the future. What he doesn't understand, as briefly as I can put it, is that his problem is that his ex-master (NFL) is too powerful for its role in civil society, so it was stupid to bow to a more powerful master.

 

Why does he look like he’s been a POW for 5 years or a photo from the Great Depression and dress like the leader of the Black Panthers with the leather coats and turtle necks and the old school fro. At this point it’s like he’s a cartoon character making a PR move

I honestly believe this almost the government trying to keep the mouth breathers distracted and divide us while bankers and government **** us over everyday. The fact this has been on tv for 2 years now shows how immature Americans are

It’s like when Ray Rice was beating his wife and the NFL was shoving those commercials down our throats acting like dudes were sitting at home thinking “thanks NFL I had no idea I should beat my wife’s ass until Aaron Rodgers told me in a commercial, thanks for showing me Jesus”

NFL should of told angry fans to go **** themselves from day one and if you aren’t saluting the flag in your living room during the pregame national anthem then you should just stfu already