Daily Times

Once upon a time not so long ago, crass consumerism was all advertising stood for in America. It eagerly sowed a “buy, buy, buy” culture with a bottomless pit and delivered skyrocketing credit card debt to middle-class families.

Today, however, the sporting giant Nike’s new campaign celebrating 30 years, of its iconic slogan ‘just do it’ has polarised the nation for featuring football player Colin Kaepernick.

Kaepernick gained notoriety in 2016, for kneeling during the football pregame national anthem. The norm is to stand with your right hand over your heart.

Once his stunt made the headlines, Kaepernick explained he was protesting police brutality against African-Americans. The Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement was starting to blow up around the same time.

Racial profiling and the routine use of lethal force against black suspects became a hot-button issue in the dying days of the Barack Obama presidency, a trend that continues today. To date, nearly 200 American sports persons, mainly football players, have followed Kaepernick’s lead and ‘taken a knee’ during the national anthem.

Nike’s campaign using the tagline ‘believe in something, even if it means sacrificing everything’, portrays Kaepernick as a social justice warrior who threw away his career to highlight an issue many politicians try to tiptoe around, or worse, dismiss as liberal propaganda. An extraordinary backlash followed the first round of print and television promotion. Social media platforms started buzzing with #boycott nike, whilst people posted videos and pictures of them ripping up Nike products.

Even the United States (US) President Donald Trump jumped into the fray and cautioned Nike it was playing with fire and risking a slump in share prices.

Why all the commotion? Well, there are surface reasons and deeper rifts.

The core trigger for America’s moral outrage seems to be Nike’s violation of the age-old maxim that politics and sports do not mix. Especially, when a quintessentially American company features an athlete who many view as thoroughly un-American, even a traitor, for repeatedly disrespecting the American national anthem and the flag.

One probable outcome of this farce is that Nike will likely have the last laugh in terms of higher stock prices and win the loyalties of millennials, who have become a legitimate force for social change

Moreover, many chortled at Nike’s credentials for making a sweeping social justice statement given its shameful track record of sweatshop production in Asia where labour exploitation is pervasive.

Still, the international community puzzles over America’s overreaction to an ad campaign that did not involve flag burning or mocking the anthem. How could such quiet protests touch a nation’s nerve?

Simply put, the United States is a highly militaristic nation with a long history of wars. Such posturing breeds a superiority complex where the flag especially is a vessel of collective honour. Any perceived disrespect to it thus sparks furious criticism from all sectors of society.

Americans reflexively thank veterans for their service and swiftly tackle any anti-state comments by bringing up the fallen soldiers who fought to keep America free. Conservatives hate Kaepernick for spitting in the face of everything America supposedly represents: liberal democracy, rule of law, human rights etc, etc. They also loathe Nike now for associating itself with BLM and the “bogus” narrative of African-Americans being systematically victimised by “white privilege.” Furthermore, reports suggest white privilege and institutionalised racism have inflated manifold since Trump was elected and the space available to African-Americans for voicing their frustrations grows smaller.

Kaepernick is hence justified in protesting the apathy of the government and more so given the unique character of the United States. Moreover, the intense recoil from Nike’s campaign surprises me. Many Americans seem to have a problem with the sporting giant taking a political stand.

Yet the long shadow of Corporate America on Capitol Hill in the shape of campaign donations for future favors is perfectly legal. Think George Soros or the Koch Brothers. So why is Nike morally obligated to toe some imaginary line when many public representatives on both ends of the political spectrum are on the payroll of one big business or another? At least Nike’s political leanings are out in the open.

There are two probable outcomes of this farce. First, Nike will likely have the last laugh in terms of higher stock prices and win the loyalties of millennials who have become a legitimate force for social change.

Kaepernick, meanwhile, may get a book or a movie deal after the dust has settled. And the NFL will probably keep raking in billions from ticket sales and advertising.

Ultimately, Nike’s controversy-magnet of a campaign will do little to affect real change as the primary culprit behind police brutality and shooting African-Americans is wealth inequality.

It has started a national conversation, sure, but rhetoric alone won’t change America.

The writer is an Ipoh-based independent journalist

Published in Daily Times, September 14^th 2018.