Well, when the short text messages consist of phrases like “tells Nike to go fuck itself”, “pathetic clown”, and “I truly and sincerely hope that Nike looses a shit-ton of business over this idiocy”, no projection is needed to detect a strong vibe of anger.
Especially when you haven’t articulated even the slightest rational justification for why you are reacting so strongly to this fairly minor issue as an instance of “pathetic clown” “idiocy” for which Nike should “go fuck itself”.
I mean, this is simply a marketing decision by Nike execs based on concern about the possible negative connotations of this one symbol for their brand image. Companies tweak their product designs based on concern about possible negative connotations of certain symbols for their brand image all the time. Why in the world are you pissed off about this one instance to the extent of hoping that Nike loses “a shit-ton of business” over it?
Are you saying that the position shown by the Arizona governor in those tweets isn’t accurately summed up as telling Nike to go fuck itself?
And again, you are projecting that I am “pissed off.” Can you not conceive of someone taking a different position than you that isn’t a straw-man frothing-at-the-mouth caricature? I assure you that I’m am perfectly calm as I roll my eyes at Kaepernick. How far back are the ultra-WOKE supposed to erase American history now? All the way back to 1492?
In what possible way does Nike’s decision not to use the “Betsy Ross flag” symbol in a 2019 sneaker design qualify as “erasing American history”?
I would have thought that having a serious discussion of the question of what exactly the “Betsy Ross” flag symbolizes, and how some modern ideological groups have tried to appropriate its symbolism, and how the positive connotations of early American independence stack up against the negative connotations of early American slavery, is the very opposite of “erasing American history”.
Mm-hmm, right, your using four separate forms of typographical emphasis simultaneously on the word “woke” doesn’t sound angry at all.
Ban may have been a bad word choice, but if society agrees with Kapernick’s reasoning, how could it not be effectively banned in society outside of a museum?
I don’t find it particularly patriotic to do either, to be honest. But to discard a symbol for this reason is pretty silly. Kapernick didn’t have to wear them if he found them distasteful for whatever reason.
The KKK has been using the Christian cross as a symbol longer and more widely than the Betsy Ross flag, and I don’t see anyone abandoning that because of an association with white supremacy.
Besides, the joke’s on them. I’ve been flying that flag for years now, and I’m a socialist. That makes it the socialist flag.
Is the swastika banned? Is the Confederate flag banned? Most people agree these symbols have been co-opted by racists and thus, have come to represent racism, and yet it’s perfectly legal to display them in or outside a museum.
If Nike really wanted to use that flag, they could’ve done so. It’s not like Kapernick held them at gunpoint; all he did was offer an opinion that made them reconsider their marketing approach.
Why is a business decision that is zero consequence to anyone worth worrying about?
Okay, now you’ve really gasted my flabber. I don’t see at all how you get from “symbol unsuitable for our sneaker marketing campaign” to “symbol that ought to be effectively banned outside of a museum”.
If Nike or Kaepernick were trying to decree that we as a society have to “discard” this symbol altogether, I would agree with you. But all they’re doing is stating why they don’t consider the symbol appropriate as a marketing device for selling their sneakers. This is Nike’s product, for which Kaepernick is a brand ambassador: I think they’re the ones who get to make that call.
Nothing about banning, nothing about erasing history, nothing about telling anybody else what symbols they can or can’t use.
Exactly what I’ve been wondering, and for which nobody seems to have a coherent answer that doesn’t drag in exaggerated interpretations like “banning”, or “erasing history”, or having to “throw away” “every US symbol pre 1965”, or “you cannot celebrate anything if it occurred during a time of injustice”, or even “consciously denigrat[ing] our nation’s history” (:rolleyes: that one’s Gov. Ducey).
Yep. The whole think with whether stuff like this is reasonable is whether it’s well, reasonable. Just establishing a general principle, like frowning on symbols deeply associated with murderous ideologies (swastika, hammer and sickle, etc) doesn’t mean you can take that principal to any extreme before people start saying it’s crazy and carried away.
You can’t compare some (who knows how big, or infinitesimally tiny) racist groups adopting a style of Revolutionary period American flag to ruling regimes in major countries adopting Nazi or Communist flags. IOW if people aren’t ‘aware’ of that use of the Betsy Ross flag, maybe it’s because it’s really minor in the scheme of things. As well as being a symbol those groups have no right to and should be not be ceded.
Or if the argument is nothing to do with fringe politics now but actually reaching the long predicted point where American founding symbols are deemed ‘white supremacist’ because slavery was tolerated in the founding, that’s also going too far IMO. Even if in theory one accepts that idea, that’s how Democrats/Left can make their ‘inevitable future political dominance’ always be in the future.
What “extreme” do you think that principle is being taken to in this situation? Saying “we’re choosing not to use this symbol in our sneaker design because it could unintentionally offend and detract from the nation’s patriotic holiday” really doesn’t sound “extreme” to me.
The idea that displaying one original Revolutionary style of American flag is ‘detracting from the nation’s patriotic holiday’ has a lot of internal tension in it, to say the least.
Extreme is in the eye of the beholder ultimately, but crystal clear to me in this case.
Either it’s automatically ceding American symbols to any indeterminately small current group which has appropriated them to promote racism (even if hardly anyone has heard of it). Or it’s saying historical US symbols (before a certain date?) are ‘white supremacist’. The first is a ridiculous reason not to display that flag IMO. The second one is a serious reason, but can’t IMO be defended by phony folksiness like ‘we’re just tryin’ to have a fun celebration the good ole USA’.
Especially after the great mass of conservatives seemingly vowed to never purchase Nike products ever again about 2 years ago, why should Nike give a rat’s ass for the opinions of people boycotting it?
Well, your flabber or how it’s gasted isn’t really my concern other than it being a kind of joy to the part of my brain that is perpetually 12 years old, but: Kapernick is reported as objecting to it due to him thinking it is a racist symbol. I don’t know how such symbols could be used in polite society if we agree with him. I don’t openly wear racist symbols*, but I also do not agree with him.
The question of the thread is “Is the ‘Betsy Ross’ flag racist”. I personally don’t see how my argument is that hard to follow in this context. I don’t wear symbols such as the swastika, even though it’s not necessarily a racist symbol in the right context. It’s not worth the bother. I’d rather that this symbol not enter in the same category, because it doesn’t even really belong in the same conversation as the problems the confederate battle flag faces everywhere or the swastika faces culturally in the west. The founders had their problems, but to pretend they were particularly racist in contrast to the general world around them isn’t really fair or the result of deep thought. The resulting country had a civil war over the issue of slavery, when you get down to brass tacks. To pretend that the flag is particularly racist ignores the time it existed in. Heck, if Kapernick had something to object to, it’d be the 50 star flag, because the country has fallen far more short in the modern era WRT racism in contrast to the modern world than it did in the revolutionary period.
In short: The racist shitheads already have several flags. Hell, they make new ones like metal bands make unreadable logos. Don’t give them more because you want a sports star to be a hero. I don’t think he’s bright enough to dictate to me what a racist symbol is at this point.
*Ok, I’ve got a Melvins (a Dada-ish metal band, they’d be the first artists shipped off in cattle cars, and they know it) t-shirt that has the totem of some SS division on it. But if you’re smart enough to recognize that as a Nazi symbol and not realize that having “Melvins” above it in bright red letters in a gothic script isn’t making fun of the Nazis, I don’t know what I can do for you. Yep, my wife still refuses to go out with me when I’m wearing it, because she’s sure that someone is going to only “get” part of it - even though she owned and sometimes publicly wore a more subtle Melvins shirt that used a similar motif in black-on-black. Yes, she is more shrewd than I am, on all fronts. I know what it means to possess a prohibited symbol, somewhat. I’ve owned a lot of offensive t-shirts. That has nothing to do with Nike or Kapernick and their commercial problems, but full disclosure and all that. I suppose my love of the Melvins and propensity for such shirts (or my stupid user name up there) puts me outside “polite society” by default, but I do know where it starts, and can see it from here. It’d be nice if portions of it didn’t move further away.
In what possible way does Nike’s decision not to use the “Betsy Ross flag” symbol in a 2019 sneaker design qualify as “erasing American history”?
