The Commander, The Military, and The Protester
I love protests. If I had been allowed to protest homework and other indignities, I would have turned out a much better person. I had to wait until college to start expressing my 1st Amendment rights--then, against the Vietnam War. That is why it struck a dissonant chord with me when President Obama said that although Kaepernick was within his Constitutional rights to protest, the veteran was hurt by it and he, the President, could understand why.
I beg to differ with the President. Unless you are part of the club--properly initiated--you cannot empathize with the other members of the group.When I condemn the doctor or the lawyer for greed, I cannot relate to their hurt feelings. When I condemn the teacher or policeman for union excesses, what do I know how they feel. When I condemn the rich man or the legislator, how can I know the hurt? Likewise, the President cannot know what it is like to sleight the government that sends a man to war unless he has gone through all the initiation rites of passage.
Let us make it clear that any sleight demonstrated by Mr. Kaepernick is a sleight against the government. It is not against the flag, the anthem, or the country. It is the government that has been attacked by Mr. Kaepernick and every one of our founding fathers would endorse such action. The government has clearly looked the other way when it came to defending the people against police brutality.
In a very general sense, the President understands the effrontery to the soldier when a protester disrespects the National Anthem. However, is his empathy even warranted? The veteran--in many polls--says that HRC is not their first choice. They seem to recognize her as the hawkish person she is and who wants to fight a war that is either illegal (never declared by Congress) or immoral as most modern day wars are.
This begs the question, what veteran is the President speaking for?Are the veterans truly upset with Mr. Kaepernick or is it sour grapes on the part of the veteran who is stifled in his expression of 1st Amendment rights by the organisation that enlisted him. Many modern day generals and admirals (usually retired) have written articles on the difficulty of the soldier or sailor to come forth and express wrongdoing within the military.
It is this persona that comes out and feels hurt by the actions of Kaepernick . However, if they understood that Mr. Kaepernick was attacking the government--not the flag, anthem, or country--there would be no controversy.
Mr. Obama has set up a straw man. Don't stand up for the National Anthem and you spit on the soldier who has enlisted to risk his life to fight the country's wars; however, one has no connection with the other. The National Anthem represents many things but of all the things it represents none is more universal than that of the righteous, virtuous, and moral mother country. The soldier may sing the National Anthem but the National Anthem does not represent the military as a righteous, virtuous, and moral member of our society. Sometimes yes, sometimes no, never always.
Comments
Post a Comment