I am ok if you think it is ok for NFL players to take a knee during the anthem. I am ok if you think it is deplorable/disrespectful etc... I would fight for either sides right to voice their opinion.
But....
I am most certainly not ok if you think they do not have a right to protest injustice in the nation during a civic activity like the playing of the national anthem. They are citizens of this nation. The anthem is a civic event. And last time I checked this nation was not based on blind unquestioning fealty|faith|support|approval to the authority of the state or its military services. Quite the opposite as the case happens to be. May I suggest you try phrasing your dissatisfaction in that you think the strength of their chosen action to challenge something so important is out of measure with the issue they are trying to increase awareness of?
But... in my personal opinion to do so would be silly. We still have race issues in this country. Young black men and minorities in general have every right to be frightened at the state of police interactions. The fact most cops are good is immaterial to the simple fact that there is a demonstrated pernicious element of law enforcement that most certainly executes oppressive action on the grounds of race. And these elements are often wrapped in the protection of the brotherhood of law enforcement. And it is not ok.
Yes today is better than yesterday. However.... Are you really..... really going to say our race is run on this issue? (I know... pardon the pun...) perhaps I should instead ask if those that think these players (and now owners?) have nothing worth protesting in this manner that there truly remains no more that needs be done?
As for the whole disrespect thing. Please explain to me again how taking a knee is an act of disrespect? Last I checked I could not find in my recollection any scenario in which kneeling was considered disrespectful. Perhaps in forcing someone to kneel as a form of subjugation? Though even in that despicable case kneeling is ostensibly considered the respectful act... and not doing it the disrespectful. It certainly isn't seen as disrespectful in church on Sunday's. Or when proposing. I do happen to think Kaepernick's initial act of sitting on the bench during the anthem (with a towel on his head if I remember correctly...) was much more open to being considered disrespectful. Something even he agrees with. Which is why at the advice of a veteran he modified his act to kneeling during the anthem.
So.... perhaps before you dismiss these players actions as un-necessary, inappropriate, disrespectful etc... and turn off their games, stop drafting them in your fantasy league and in general kick your pigskin habit in disgust at their yellow bellied ungrateful lack of patriotic spirit. I ask you to consider what it is you would care enough about to lose a multimillion dollar job playing a game for a living over. And maybe... just maybe consider that this topic is that important to these guys. And that perhaps there is a possibility they are justified. If nothing... at least start a discussion about that topic and not this red herring of "what is and is not appropriate to do during the playing of the national anthem".
Speaking of red herrings...
This whole mess is a pretty good example of our Commander in Tweet's ability to drag the nations attention away from other topics. Like the last ditch effort of the Republican's to run through a simple majority reconciliation vote repealing the ACA. Committing the very sin they so vehemently admonish the Democrats for in passing it in the first place.
Was the partisan vote to pass the ACA good? Nope. Was it better than a repeal attempt through reconciliation requiring simple majority? Yep. The Dems at least have a small shred of dignity to hold onto in that 60 vote pass even if it was entirely on party lines. But in case you missed it that is 'Damning with faint praise". For all the good it has done in extending coverage to millions, the lack of a bi-partisan solution always meant the ACA was a wounded abortion of a policy. And it certainly has issues.
WHICH IS WHY BOTH PARTIES NEED TO GROW UP AND GET BACK TO DOING THEIR JOBS FINDING WHAT IS BEST FOR THE NATION. And the rest of us need to grow up to and accept that there is no "my way or the highway" answer to this and support our representatives working across the isle in the best interest of the nation. Turn the television off and dig into the details and stop spouting sound bites from your particular corner of the world. Healthcare impacts all of us. And our system is beyond sick/insane/inefficient you name it. It was not better before the ACA and the ACA is at best a first step in addressing the issue.
We have a health care system that is not doing its job on par with other nations in the world even though it costs us a hell of a lot more than it does them. And we are mired in a set of partisan bickering whose logic and arguments seems to be on an intellectual par with two kids in the back seat trying to even up "Got you lasts".
Finally:
You want to know what scares me? The potential rationalization a new nuclear power could make over attempting a non-lethal (at least directly) nuclear driven EMP blast at altitude above the continental US. We are about to watch Puerto Rico go through rebuilding their entire power grid in the wake of Maria. I hope the mainland US will not be doing something similar courtesy of a "gift" from "Rocket Man".
I wonder if President Trump and all the gung ho America First crowd has any inkling of the disconnect in saying "America First... and other nations should be for themselves first" (or UK first, fuck the EU etc....) and not connecting that is EXACTLY what North Korea is doing? And Iran? Nationalism is Tribalism writ large. And sooner or later that means this planet aint big enough for the lot of us. Not to be corny or anything but the phrase "There can be only one" comes to mind. If you think the last 50ish years of relative global peace is just how it is you have little appreciation of history.
Figuring out how to get the human race on a peaceful common globalist footing vs these massive tribal/nationalities is a matter of our long term survival in my humble opinion. North Korea is acting LOGICALLY and SANE in being a nation that does not want to exist at the whim of the current global power structure. This is not about them being right or wrong. It is about how do you survive if you are Kim Jong Un. If you want a seat at the big boy table as a nation the ante is nuclear power. The US in particular has set a precedent in how we act towards non-nuclear powers if we view them as a sufficient enough threat even when we do not have world support. So has Russia. You want to find out how dangerous something is? Back it into a corner and give it no other option. This is what we are currently doing to a nation that is playing with nuclear fire and who has a shit ton of guns able to blanket Seoul at the proverbial drop of a hat. Hopefully Kim Jung Un has no illusions about his nations no win scenario's as regards the detonation of a nuclear device over a world population and he is content in playing a nice game of "political" chess as opposed to GTNW.
Really finally:
I try to have something nice to say when being so negative on things like regarding the republican handling of the ACA repeal attempts or disparaging the President with a moniker like "commander in tweet". The lifting of the Jones act for Puerto Rico by the Trump administration was a good thing. (next bits edited as I have read more about the Jones act). If you read previous version of this I had a bit about Jones act where I was thinking it prohibited foreign trade vessels landing in the ports. The Jones act is about shipping between US ports, not international vessels coming to call. Basically if you take goods from one US port to another the Jones act requires that vessel to be US built and manned, owned by US citizens. So... a ship from China can't stop at Hawaii drop of goods and pick up Hawaiian goods to continue on to mainland US, then pick up goods at a mainland port and drop back off at Hawaii on the way back. This often leads to ships going to the mainland and then US ships carrying all cabotage traffic to other US ports. Not quite as bad as what I was thinking... . And it has almost the same effect as dead legging cargo space on ships (IE stopping but not adding anything when leaving) generally means shipping does not stop at the smaller ports of the island territories and Hawaii. Doesn't help Hawaii is already well off trans continental shipping routes. US built ships, crews and ownership makes port to port US shipping very expensive. The act ostensibly ensures the US will maintain a healthy mercantile fleet that is needed in times of war etc... As usual the issue is more complex than at first it seems. Still a good thing it was waived... still something that needs to be addressed even for normal trade.
No comments:
Post a Comment