Race and Ethnicity in the US Military Essay

Taking a Knee and the Cultural Problem at the Heart of Race

Introduction

The recent riots over the death of George Floyd has stemmed not so much from the killing of an unarmed black man by police but rather from the perception that the black community in general has been marginalized and oppressed for years. High profile celebrities like LeBron James, Steph Curry and Colin Kaepernick have supported the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, as have many black communities across the nation. However, for blacks and other races and ethnicities in the military, the desire to speak out against oppression while at the same time honoring and respecting the flag and the rule of law has presented a paradox of sorts. On the one hand, taking a knee during the National Anthem became a sign of protest for oppressed voices, spearheaded by Kaepernick and later endorsed by Nike, other celebrities and politicians. On the other hand, standing for the anthem and saluting the flag and all it represents, particularly the sacrifice that thousands have made in recent years in giving their lives for the country in active service in foreign lands, remains a sign of honest respect and appreciation. The push and pull of conflicted feelings and emotions over the issue of taking a knee, speaking out against oppression and standing up for the flag recalls to mind the tension that erupted among American citizens over how to protest the Vietnam War—with some veterans even feeling conflicted about where to stand on the issue. When it comes to race and ethnicity in the US military, the conflict between supporting a popular movement by taking a knee and supporting the troops by standing up for the flag is one that many face.

Othering

One of the most problematic issues at the heart of race in America and in the military is the issue of othering. Othering is the treatment of another person as alien, as different, and as someone to be excluded from the main. It is a method of marginalization and oppression that is explained by labeling theory as a way of attaching a disparaging label to other groups so as to prevent them from seeming validated and having power. Othering puts people on the sidelines and negates their existence as meaningful in and of itself. Nadine Naber states that because of cultural racism in the wake of 9/11, othering has exploded and it has led to tensions throughout American communities. To address the issue of othering, Colin Kaepernick began taking a knee during NFL games when the National Anthem was sung. His actions outraged some but invigorated others who wanted to see a discourse on the issue promoted in the national spotlight.

However, having that discourse became a problem because of the role that the flag and the anthem played in certain associations made by the act of taking the knee during the anthem. Graber et al. analyzed ten American newspapers and “found that patriotic ideals—the American flag, military, and National Anthem, in particular—were used as a way to avoid completely discussions on racism” (1). In other words, by playing up the patriotism angle, discourse on othering and the oppression of black communities was sidestepped. Those who sought to have that discourse complained that it had nothing to do with the flag and that taking a knee was simply about showing more sensitivity to a topic that never received much traction in the media. By taking his protest to the national spotlight and kneeling during the anthem, Kaepernick was suggesting that he would no longer remain silent and that he would, ultimately, be willing to sacrifice his career if it meant losing his job in order to put the issue of black oppression in the spotlight. Thus, there was an attempt to remove the issue of patriotism from the discourse. However, Kaepernick stated explicitly that his actions were directed to the flag: “I am not going to…

Some parts of this document are missing

Click here to view full document

…which both Protestants and Jewish groups see themselves as the chosen people. That culture of elitism runs through and through American civilian life—but it is not found in the military, because the military has more of a hierarchically structured but ultimately egalitarian ethical principle, in which every person in the military is seen as vital and important. In a community where elitists view themselves as superior to others there can be no such egalitarianism. There can be only division and anger, as Carbado shows. If the issue of racial and ethnic oppression in America is going to be addressed, it has to be addressed at the level of culture, as the military has done. Then there will be no more dispute over whether one should take a knee during the anthem or stand and salute the flag. Everyone will have already learned to take a knee in their daily actions towards one another, so that when the anthem plays they can all stand with pride to show their patriotism for a country that has learned to structure itself in a truly egalitarian way.

Conclusion

The issue of structural racism in America is deeply entrenched in the nation’s history and the recent riots and protests have only shown that the wound has yet to heal. For people in the military there is the sense that taking a knee during the National Anthem disrespects them and their sacrifices for the country. For those kneeling there is the sense that people need to take part in the discourse on racial oppression and start admitting that there is a problem that needs facing. The issue is not how to reconcile these two but rather why the culture of the two is different. Americans should be united in culture, not divided. Yet because of an elitist cultural framework that was adopted from the beginning of the country’s founding, the nation has always been divided. That culture is what needs to change and it should reflect the culture of…