Colin Kaepernick and a False Dichotomy

“It probably also guarantees he will not be standing anytime soon, given that these are highly charged social issues which are deeply complex and are probably not going to be ‘fixed’ in the foreseeable future.”

Colin Kaepernick has generated much attention since his decision to kneel during the playing of the American national anthem. It was not unexpected, then, that Kaepernick’s reaction to the horrific and tragic death of George Floyd while in police custody made news this past week: “When civility leads to death, revolting is the only logical reaction. The cries for peace will rain down, and when they do, they will land on deaf ears, because your violence has brought this resistance. We have the right to fight back!”

As quoted by Georgetown sociology professor Michael Eric Dyson, Kaepernick has said he is “going to continue to stand with the people that are being oppressed. To me, this is something that has to change, and when there’s significant change – and I feel like that flag represents what it’s supposed to represent, and this country is representing people the way it’s supposed to – I’ll stand.”

Kaepernick’s statement is broad and wide-ranging. It is also vague about what constitutes a state of affairs where the flag “represents what it’s supposed to represent” and the “country is representing the people the way it’s supposed to.” People can have a multiplicity of opinions about what state of affairs would prevail when the flag “represents what it’s supposed to represent” or the “country is representing the people the way it’s supposed to.” I am not prepared to grant Kaepernick (or anyone else) the role of arbiter on when it is permissible to stand for the anthem.