Nebraska's Michael Rose-Ivey receives racial backlash for anthem protest

[GBRHouston]

 

 

This is how I feel. It is not racist to be against what the players did, but the conversation that has followed here and all over the U.S. has shown that quite a few people are against it for racist reasons. Namely the people who say they have nothing to protest against.

Oy vey.

 

Am I being called racist even after saying multiple times that I am not racist, and that I agree racism is a problem? That is what Landlord seems to be saying. I am from Texas, and the vast majority of people there are not racist, I am not going to feed any stereotypes. However, I have also seen some racism there. some of it pretty bad, to the point where it even offended me, and I am white. So do not open your mouth to call someone racist if they have not said a single racist thing.

 

 

Read what I wrote again. My comment wasn't aimed at you.

 

I referred to Landlord in my entire post, not you. I quoted you by accident when I meant to quote him, my apologies for the misunderstanding.

[Moiraine]

I do not post much on here - mostly when I drink too much after a game day (sorry moderators). I am a younger guy, so the ways of the world (past, present and future) are always being shaped in my mind as I try to learn more. I do have some black cousins, black friends etc... and I also know that I am a privileged white male that does not see everything through the right lens all the time - I'm not perfect. But I know that these issues exist, I know that there are problems, and at the same time I know that people can generally express themselves however they want. I don't agree with aspects of the anthem protests or BLM movement (I am an ALM kind of guy), but I also admit I do not have intimate knowledge about either - just a clouded opinion. What I think I know is that these movements are working - positive or negative - people are talking about it. In the PR world that is generally viewed as a win - being at the forefront of the general public's thought. Hopefully more tangible things are done soon, more steps taken to actually do something after this momentum has been created from these expressions of free speech. You have people talking, you are on the public's mind, now what is your ask? Get people to act on them, ask them for something, or nothing will change. Heaven forbid you have started all of this and something tragic happens in the landscape of America (which, lets face it, seems to be at least every 6 months or so) and you will have to try and re-capture the fickle media fed minds across the country.

 

Regardless of any of that, I live in Florida now, which means I should generally never be embarrassed about anything given what people are like here... but for the first time this week - after hearing some of the things that 'leaders' said from our state - I was pretty embarrassed to be associated with Nebraska. It will forever be my home, I know that the majority are good, and I still have a deep love for it - but it feels like a large black eye. Just my unwanted two cents on all of this.

 

 

Unfortunately it's not limited to Nebraska and I'm guessing the reaction to other players doing the same thing is similar.

[Moiraine]

I referred to Landlord in my entire post, not you. I quoted you by accident when I meant to quote him, my apologies for the misunderstanding.

no prob

[GBRHouston]

Also, slavery was abolished 150 years ago. Using that for a platform about how that makes the anthem racist is 150 years outdated. Same with any other argument about this country, albeit by a shorter time frame.

[RedDenver]

 

 

I love how freedom of speech is "a great thing" until people say they don't support the anthem protests. Freedom of speech goes out the window for us who don't support according to a lot of people.

This is absolutely false. The 1st Amendment protects you from censorship not from criticism. You are being criticized not censored.

 

I get what the 1st amendment means, and in most cases, I will agree with you. Nobody non-violent on either side of this issue has been arrested. However, I see supporters using the first amendment as a platform to argue with non-supporters. The first amendment means that somebody cannot be prosecuted for what they say or what message they try to send.

 

So then why claim your "freedom of speech goes out the window", when that is clearly not the case by your own admission?

[zoogs]

Also, slavery was abolished 150 years ago. Using that for a platform about how that makes the anthem racist is 150 years outdated. Same with any other argument about this country, albeit by a shorter time frame.

 

You seem to insist, over and over, that equality for all has long arrived in America.

Why do we believe this to be true? What's the basis for that claim?

[RedDenver]

Also, slavery was abolished 150 years ago. Using that for a platform about how that makes the anthem racist is 150 years outdated. Same with any other argument about this country, albeit by a shorter time frame.

You do know the anthem was written roughly 150 years BEFORE slavery was abolished, right?

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

There's something big happening and I think we need to look at the possibility that it's good.

 

I think guys like Ricketts and Daub took the kind of position they have taken their whole lives, and fully expected the bedrock majority in our conservative state to welcome their comments. It was the initial first reaction of a lot of people. Good people who don't think they're racist.

 

Maybe Ricketts and Daub and others immediately outraged didn't expect the blowback to go against them. Not the politically correct blowback some try to blame on media orchestration, but a genuine seismic shift of a younger generation who shrug these things off, and a boomer generation that has have lived long enough to realize their personal experience doesn't dictate everyone else's.

 

Knee jerk reactions are giving in to reappraisals. People are figuring out they can live with more differences than they thought. Combat veterans aren't speaking with one voice, and neither are BLM supporters. The coach is speaking more about unity than division. The football player in question is meeting with the Governor.

 

Honestly, for as much as people hate these kind of threads, I'm pretty impressed with the level of discourse on a Husker football fan site.

 

Michael Rose-Ivey certainly wasn't wrong doing what he did for the reasons he stated.

 

What exactly do you mean by the part in bold? That anyone who disagrees with CK or others protesting the anthem are racist? Please, explain your rationale.

 

 

I mean good people who don't believe they are racist.

 

People like me. Who sometimes has to be reminded that my experience and wishful thinking doesn't explain everything away.

 

Good people who simply don't HAVE the experience. Who can't understand what it's like being black in America, and truly, sweetly believe that because they get along so well with that nice black lady in Accounts Receivable that race isn't a problem anymore.

 

Good people who believe in good things like dutiful policemen, brave soldiers and the U.S. Constitution, but get swayed into thinking a legitimate protest flies in the face of that. Because we seem hard-wired to choose sides. If you think the mainstream media advances a progressive agenda, you also have Sean (look at Chicago!) Hannity churning out the simplistic bromides that good people swallow and repeat without much reflection.

 

But when you get a little more reflection -- like what's happening now -- a lot of good people are kind and honest enough to admit they really don't understand what someone else's life might be like. And they're open to the possibility that their inattention has played into a lot of systemic racism. The kind of racism that relies on good people doing nothing.

 

That's my rationale.

 

We good?

 

 

I appreciate the lengthy response and agree that nobody understand what another person's life has been like. I know I have endured my own share of challenges, as have many individuals whether they are black, white, hispanic, or any race. But I don't agree with the notion that, just because I have not encountered the same challenges as MRI that I am inherently racist or contributing to some sort of systematic racism. That's where discussions break down and divisions arise, when some (often called elites) try to tell others what they think or how they view a particular issue without really knowing the person.

[Pedro Guerrero]

What are peoples views on the way the High School in California protested the night Kaepernick came to visit?

 

 

 

If this isn't the place for this post, please move it to the one going on in the Politics Forum.

[Moiraine]

 

 

There's something big happening and I think we need to look at the possibility that it's good.

 

I think guys like Ricketts and Daub took the kind of position they have taken their whole lives, and fully expected the bedrock majority in our conservative state to welcome their comments. It was the initial first reaction of a lot of people. Good people who don't think they're racist.

 

Maybe Ricketts and Daub and others immediately outraged didn't expect the blowback to go against them. Not the politically correct blowback some try to blame on media orchestration, but a genuine seismic shift of a younger generation who shrug these things off, and a boomer generation that has have lived long enough to realize their personal experience doesn't dictate everyone else's.

 

Knee jerk reactions are giving in to reappraisals. People are figuring out they can live with more differences than they thought. Combat veterans aren't speaking with one voice, and neither are BLM supporters. The coach is speaking more about unity than division. The football player in question is meeting with the Governor.

 

Honestly, for as much as people hate these kind of threads, I'm pretty impressed with the level of discourse on a Husker football fan site.

 

Michael Rose-Ivey certainly wasn't wrong doing what he did for the reasons he stated.

What exactly do you mean by the part in bold? That anyone who disagrees with CK or others protesting the anthem are racist? Please, explain your rationale.

 

I mean good people who don't believe they are racist.

 

People like me. Who sometimes has to be reminded that my experience and wishful thinking doesn't explain everything away.

 

Good people who simply don't HAVE the experience. Who can't understand what it's like being black in America, and truly, sweetly believe that because they get along so well with that nice black lady in Accounts Receivable that race isn't a problem anymore.

 

Good people who believe in good things like dutiful policemen, brave soldiers and the U.S. Constitution, but get swayed into thinking a legitimate protest flies in the face of that. Because we seem hard-wired to choose sides. If you think the mainstream media advances a progressive agenda, you also have Sean (look at Chicago!) Hannity churning out the simplistic bromides that good people swallow and repeat without much reflection.

 

But when you get a little more reflection -- like what's happening now -- a lot of good people are kind and honest enough to admit they really don't understand what someone else's life might be like. And they're open to the possibility that their inattention has played into a lot of systemic racism. The kind of racism that relies on good people doing nothing.

 

That's my rationale.

 

We good?

 

 

Very, very well put. I see this as naive racism. Another example is those that fight and claw to find some other reason that people have bad experiences. It couldn't possibly be due to their race.

 

Or, people who say the issues minorities face are a "cultural problem." When people say "it's a cultural problem" it's a way to deflect blame and place it on those very people who are experiencing it. Saying it's a cultural problem is another way of saying "it's your fault."

[HuskerNation1]

 

I do not post much on here - mostly when I drink too much after a game day (sorry moderators). I am a younger guy, so the ways of the world (past, present and future) are always being shaped in my mind as I try to learn more. I do have some black cousins, black friends etc... and I also know that I am a privileged white male that does not see everything through the right lens all the time - I'm not perfect. But I know that these issues exist, I know that there are problems, and at the same time I know that people can generally express themselves however they want. I don't agree with aspects of the anthem protests or BLM movement (I am an ALM kind of guy), but I also admit I do not have intimate knowledge about either - just a clouded opinion. What I think I know is that these movements are working - positive or negative - people are talking about it. In the PR world that is generally viewed as a win - being at the forefront of the general public's thought. Hopefully more tangible things are done soon, more steps taken to actually do something after this momentum has been created from these expressions of free speech. You have people talking, you are on the public's mind, now what is your ask? Get people to act on them, ask them for something, or nothing will change. Heaven forbid you have started all of this and something tragic happens in the landscape of America (which, lets face it, seems to be at least every 6 months or so) and you will have to try and re-capture the fickle media fed minds across the country.

 

Regardless of any of that, I live in Florida now, which means I should generally never be embarrassed about anything given what people are like here... but for the first time this week - after hearing some of the things that 'leaders' said from our state - I was pretty embarrassed to be associated with Nebraska. It will forever be my home, I know that the majority are good, and I still have a deep love for it - but it feels like a large black eye. Just my unwanted two cents on all of this.

 

 

Unfortunately it's not limited to Nebraska and I'm guessing the reaction to other players doing the same thing is similar.

 

 

You are right about this. I believe it was the Michigan players that are putting the "black power" fists up during the anthem, which opens up a different can of worms in my mind.

[ColoNoCoHusker]

 

 

There's something big happening and I think we need to look at the possibility that it's good.

 

I think guys like Ricketts and Daub took the kind of position they have taken their whole lives, and fully expected the bedrock majority in our conservative state to welcome their comments. It was the initial first reaction of a lot of people. Good people who don't think they're racist.

 

Maybe Ricketts and Daub and others immediately outraged didn't expect the blowback to go against them. Not the politically correct blowback some try to blame on media orchestration, but a genuine seismic shift of a younger generation who shrug these things off, and a boomer generation that has have lived long enough to realize their personal experience doesn't dictate everyone else's.

 

Knee jerk reactions are giving in to reappraisals. People are figuring out they can live with more differences than they thought. Combat veterans aren't speaking with one voice, and neither are BLM supporters. The coach is speaking more about unity than division. The football player in question is meeting with the Governor.

 

Honestly, for as much as people hate these kind of threads, I'm pretty impressed with the level of discourse on a Husker football fan site.

 

Michael Rose-Ivey certainly wasn't wrong doing what he did for the reasons he stated.

What exactly do you mean by the part in bold? That anyone who disagrees with CK or others protesting the anthem are racist? Please, explain your rationale.

Yeah, that whole paragraph comes off like a passive aggressive form of calling conservatives racist.

 

 

If you are referring to Social Conservatives, then typically by definition, these people defend institutions, systems, beliefs, and traditions that are discriminatory to other groups. While those people may not intend to be racist or discriminatory, it can often be a direct consequence. If you are talking Fiscal Conservatives, I think that is an invalid connection.

 

That said, the way I interpreted Guy's statement is Conscious vs Unconscious Discrimination. The latter happens all the time and it's important everyone is constantly evaluating our positions. This is also a big part of what is driving the protests...

[Moiraine]

 

 

 

There's something big happening and I think we need to look at the possibility that it's good.

 

I think guys like Ricketts and Daub took the kind of position they have taken their whole lives, and fully expected the bedrock majority in our conservative state to welcome their comments. It was the initial first reaction of a lot of people. Good people who don't think they're racist.

 

Maybe Ricketts and Daub and others immediately outraged didn't expect the blowback to go against them. Not the politically correct blowback some try to blame on media orchestration, but a genuine seismic shift of a younger generation who shrug these things off, and a boomer generation that has have lived long enough to realize their personal experience doesn't dictate everyone else's.

 

Knee jerk reactions are giving in to reappraisals. People are figuring out they can live with more differences than they thought. Combat veterans aren't speaking with one voice, and neither are BLM supporters. The coach is speaking more about unity than division. The football player in question is meeting with the Governor.

 

Honestly, for as much as people hate these kind of threads, I'm pretty impressed with the level of discourse on a Husker football fan site.

 

Michael Rose-Ivey certainly wasn't wrong doing what he did for the reasons he stated.

What exactly do you mean by the part in bold? That anyone who disagrees with CK or others protesting the anthem are racist? Please, explain your rationale.

 

Yeah, that whole paragraph comes off like a passive aggressive form of calling conservatives racist.

 

If you are referring to Social Conservatives, then typically by definition, these people defend institutions, systems, beliefs, and traditions that are discriminatory to other groups. While those people may not intend to be racist or discriminatory, it can often be a direct consequence. If you are talking Fiscal Conservatives, I think that is an invalid connection.

 

That said, the way I interpreted Guy's statement is Conscious vs Unconscious Discrimination. The latter happens all the time and it's important everyone is constantly evaluating our positions. This is also a big part of what is driving the protests...

 

 

I didn't make any connection whatsoever in his posts to conservatives. Those two people happen to be conservative but I don't recall anyone here relating the two things.

[GBRHouston]

 

Also, slavery was abolished 150 years ago. Using that for a platform about how that makes the anthem racist is 150 years outdated. Same with any other argument about this country, albeit by a shorter time frame.

 

You seem to insist, over and over, that equality for all has long arrived in America.

Why do we believe this to be true? What's the basis for that claim?

 

I keep being misunderstood.

 

Politically, yes, we are ALL equal. HOWEVER, there is still racism out there, and it would be great if there was not. In society, no, of course we are not equal. Hopefully that makes me clear.

[ColoNoCoHusker]

 

 

 

 

There's something big happening and I think we need to look at the possibility that it's good.

 

I think guys like Ricketts and Daub took the kind of position they have taken their whole lives, and fully expected the bedrock majority in our conservative state to welcome their comments. It was the initial first reaction of a lot of people. Good people who don't think they're racist.

 

Maybe Ricketts and Daub and others immediately outraged didn't expect the blowback to go against them. Not the politically correct blowback some try to blame on media orchestration, but a genuine seismic shift of a younger generation who shrug these things off, and a boomer generation that has have lived long enough to realize their personal experience doesn't dictate everyone else's.

 

Knee jerk reactions are giving in to reappraisals. People are figuring out they can live with more differences than they thought. Combat veterans aren't speaking with one voice, and neither are BLM supporters. The coach is speaking more about unity than division. The football player in question is meeting with the Governor.

 

Honestly, for as much as people hate these kind of threads, I'm pretty impressed with the level of discourse on a Husker football fan site.

 

Michael Rose-Ivey certainly wasn't wrong doing what he did for the reasons he stated.

What exactly do you mean by the part in bold? That anyone who disagrees with CK or others protesting the anthem are racist? Please, explain your rationale.

 

Yeah, that whole paragraph comes off like a passive aggressive form of calling conservatives racist.

 

If you are referring to Social Conservatives, then typically by definition, these people defend institutions, systems, beliefs, and traditions that are discriminatory to other groups. While those people may not intend to be racist or discriminatory, it can often be a direct consequence. If you are talking Fiscal Conservatives, I think that is an invalid connection.

 

That said, the way I interpreted Guy's statement is Conscious vs Unconscious Discrimination. The latter happens all the time and it's important everyone is constantly evaluating our positions. This is also a big part of what is driving the protests...

 

 

I didn't make any connection whatsoever in his posts to conservatives. Those two people happen to be conservative but I don't recall anyone here relating the two things.

 

 

I was responding to Savage Husker's statement who made that connection...