> playing the national anthem before a sporting event is an extremely political action to begin with
no that's not a political action, because the intent of the song is not to display some political message, but to display a sign of respect to the nation that has enabled the game to exist.
Is it a political action if the happy birthday song is played at McDonalds for a birthday party? It only becomes political when an action has intent behind it to display a message that furthers a political agenda.
The kneeling at a football game is political, because those people who kneel knows that their kneeling is going to be seen by millions, and thus they can leverage their visibility (due to their position as players or at least is on camera). Therefore, it's highly political - they want to send a message out there to as many people as they could that they support a particular cause (and implicitly want an outsider that also happen to be watching the game to also support). Would you declare that it's OK for the same group of people to perform a nazi salute under the same circumstances? If you're OK with that, then I would be OK with "political" actions in my football game.
The problem in this discussion here is that many are unable to separate their own political leaning with the general idea of political expression in non-political settings (such as a football game or place of business). I keep hearing that apolitical stance is not possible - but then if there are politiking that they do not like, then it's not allowed (aka, if a company "forced" their employees to engage in white-nationalist politics).
That's why I take the stance of apolitical neutrality in public places where politics isn't expected (e.g., in a place of business).
no that's not a political action, because the intent of the song is not to display some political message, but to display a sign of respect to the nation that has enabled the game to exist.
Is it a political action if the happy birthday song is played at McDonalds for a birthday party? It only becomes political when an action has intent behind it to display a message that furthers a political agenda.
The kneeling at a football game is political, because those people who kneel knows that their kneeling is going to be seen by millions, and thus they can leverage their visibility (due to their position as players or at least is on camera). Therefore, it's highly political - they want to send a message out there to as many people as they could that they support a particular cause (and implicitly want an outsider that also happen to be watching the game to also support). Would you declare that it's OK for the same group of people to perform a nazi salute under the same circumstances? If you're OK with that, then I would be OK with "political" actions in my football game.
The problem in this discussion here is that many are unable to separate their own political leaning with the general idea of political expression in non-political settings (such as a football game or place of business). I keep hearing that apolitical stance is not possible - but then if there are politiking that they do not like, then it's not allowed (aka, if a company "forced" their employees to engage in white-nationalist politics).
That's why I take the stance of apolitical neutrality in public places where politics isn't expected (e.g., in a place of business).