I remember I was still writing opinion columns for the Indianapolis Star during the height of the Colin Kaepernick-inspired national anthem kneeling. You couldn't find a voice at my home state's newspaper of record, particularly among its sportswriters, that had a negative word to write about this form of protest.
I asked, "Isn't it all theater?"
They answered that of course it was theatrical in the sense that the players were making a visual display of their displeasure with our country's continuing racial injustice.
"But isn't it all divisive and self-serving, attention-seeking?" I would respond. They would flatly dismiss those concerns, pointing out that every symbolic protest is divisive to those who don't agree, and they are only useful if they draw attention. But standing up for one's convictions is never self-serving – it's actually serving a cause greater than oneself to endure the scorn and criticism to make a stand. Besides, they stressed, it was all peaceful.
Fair enough.
Then came October 8, 2017. The San Francisco 49ers came to Indianapolis for a game. The hometown Colts had set aside the date to retire the jersey of legendary quarterback Peyton Manning. Former Indiana congressman, governor, and sitting Vice President of the United States Mike Pence would be in attendance.
During the national anthem, several players on both teams took a knee, and Vice President Pence promptly left the game in protest of the protest. The Indy Star sportswriters (much like their national brethren) could concentrate on nothing else. More ink was spilled criticizing Pence's actions than on Peyton's enshrinement or the game itself.
And what was said?
- That Pence's actions had been "pure theater."
- That Pence had come for the sole purpose of "being divisive."
- That what Pence did was "self-serving" and "attention seeking."
But wait a minute. These same voices had told me repeatedly that all those things are okay when you are protesting and taking a stand for what you believe in. Why was it objectively courageous, brave, and an exemplary depiction of the 1st Amendment in action when players kneeled regardless of whether you agreed with their cause, but not the same thing when Pence walked out regardless of whether you agreed with him?
I never got an answer for that question. That's why I am not hopeful that I'll hear a reasonable explanation as to why the same people who celebrate coaches like the NBA's Gregg Popovich when he inarticulately rips into "old white men ruining this country" simultaneously support the censure of coaches like the NFL's Jack Del Rio when he inarticulately complains that January 6th rioters are being treated harsher than the Black Lives Matter rioters.
Why is Del Rio's divisive rhetoric a blight on the reputation of the league, an embarrassment to his team, and worthy of a $100,000 fine while Popovich's divisive rhetoric is celebrated?
Maybe it's time we stop pretending this is really all that confusing or hard to understand. It's inconsistent, yes. And it's obviously hypocritical. But none of it is accidental, unintentional, or hard to explain. Progressives dominate the public narrative and are content – from the pages of their newspapers, the airwaves of their networks, the feeds of their social media platforms – to condemn, censure, and financially punish those whose speech contradicts their agenda.
That totalitarian impulse isn't confined to the left side of the political aisle, but it's hardly a secret that at this point in the life of our society, they alone have the comprehensive ability to act upon it ruthlessly and effectively.
