Author Topic: Bestie Ross Nike shoe cancelled because of ties with Slavery  (Read 499 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3944
One could argue that removing the flag from the shoe is not ignoring history but doing exactly the opposite.

You could. I wouldn't.
As I said, where do you draw the line. Every US flag up until 1865 had stars on it representing slave states.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline Omni

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6913
You could. I wouldn't.
As I said, where do you draw the line. Every US flag up until 1865 had stars on it representing slave states.

Nobody is banning any flags. Nike is simply removing it from a shoe. Keep whatever flag you like but don't ignore it's historical realities. 

Online wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3944
Nobody is banning any flags. Nike is simply removing it from a shoe. Keep whatever flag you like but don't ignore it's historical realities.

Looking at a flag is not ignoring historical realities. Denying its existence is. I don't care what Nike does. Let's face it, we can make up reasons not to recognize any flag, including our own.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline Granny

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 856
You could. I wouldn't.
As I said, where do you draw the line. Every US flag up until 1865 had stars on it representing slave states.

Every flag back then wasn't trying to sell Nike shoes with Colin Kaepernick as spokesperson.
It's just capitalism. Lol
« Last Edit: July 03, 2019, 11:40:35 pm by Granny »

Offline Poonlight Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3805
Should we ignore the fact that certain symbols have attachments to former practices such as slavery? Live and learn is of course a good concept but equally important is the concept that "those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it"

Certain symbols obviously encompass things like slavery (confederate flag) or genocide (Nazi symbol), because those negative things are or are a major part of their raison d'etre.

The Betsy Ross flag & the 13 original colonies mean a lot more than slavery, just like the Red Ensign means a lot more than LGBT who couldn't get married or women who couldn't vote.  If largely positive symbols now only mean the negative components of them then like i've said we need to ban or disassociate a lot of symbols, like the Christian crucifix, Israeli flag etc.  There's going to be groups with endless gripes with everything because history is never sparkling clean.

The US Declaration of Independence, US Constitution, and US Bill of Rights are 3 of the greatest things ever written in the history of human civilization.   They have a few flaws, they've largely been fixed.  The 13 colonies did not secede from Britain for slavery's sake. It's a crazy slippery slope that will never end.  These types of people whether they realize it or not wish to slowly redefine the history of much of western civilization as a history of an oppressive white male patriarchy.  Sure in some ways it was, but there's so much more to it than that. I'd rather celebrate it while recognizing its flaws & as a step towards progress than denigrate it as evil.
"The child who is not embraced by the village will burn it down to feel its warmth"  - African proverb
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline Omni

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6913
Certain symbols obviously encompass things like slavery (confederate flag) or genocide (Nazi symbol), because those negative things are or are a major part of their raison d'etre.

The Betsy Ross flag & the 13 original colonies mean a lot more than slavery, just like the Red Ensign means a lot more than LGBT who couldn't get married or women who couldn't vote.  If largely positive symbols now only mean the negative components of them then like i've said we need to ban or disassociate a lot of symbols, like the Christian crucifix, Israeli flag etc.  There's going to be groups with endless gripes with everything because history is never sparkling clean.

The US Declaration of Independence, US Constitution, and US Bill of Rights are 3 of the greatest things ever written in the history of human civilization.   They have a few flaws, they've largely been fixed.  The 13 colonies did not secede from Britain for slavery's sake. It's a crazy slippery slope that will never end.  These types of people whether they realize it or not wish to slowly redefine the history of much of western civilization as a history of an oppressive white male patriarchy.  Sure in some ways it was, but there's so much more to it than that. I'd rather celebrate it while recognizing its flaws & as a step towards progress than denigrate it as evil.

And some types of people, (perhaps those mostly responsible for it) are trying to redefine history to erase that white male oppressive patriarchy. See the difference?

Online wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3944
And some types of people, (perhaps those mostly responsible for it) are trying to redefine history to erase that white male oppressive patriarchy. See the difference?

No. The history of western civilization is far from squeaky clean but in fact it has evolved the majority of successful liberal democracies on the planet, perhaps all of them. They didn't just happen. Apparently evolution isn't woke.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline Omni

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6913
No. The history of western civilization is far from squeaky clean but in fact it has evolved the majority of successful liberal democracies on the planet, perhaps all of them. They didn't just happen. Apparently evolution isn't woke.

Yes of course we have done well and so good for us we can rest on our laurels to a point. What I disagree with is, especially in the US, that people like to dismiss the fact that the basis of their wealth came from the backs of slaves.

Online wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3944
Yes of course we have done well and so good for us we can rest on our laurels to a point. What I disagree with is, especially in the US, that people like to dismiss the fact that the basis of their wealth came from the backs of slaves.

Do they? The millions of post bellum immigrants didn't have anything to do with it?
Most of Canada's initial wealth was built on fur trade using indigenous peoples.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline Poonlight Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3805
And some types of people, (perhaps those mostly responsible for it) are trying to redefine history to erase that white male oppressive patriarchy. See the difference?

They are 2 sides of the same coin, aren't they?  I don't agree with either.
"The child who is not embraced by the village will burn it down to feel its warmth"  - African proverb

Offline Omni

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6913
Do they? The millions of post bellum immigrants didn't have anything to do with it?
Most of Canada's initial wealth was built on fur trade using indigenous peoples.

Thanks for enforcing my point.

Offline kimmy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3414
  • Location: Kim City BC
There seems to be some confusion here.

Nike isn't attempting to tear down monuments, remove museum exhibits, rewrite history books, or anything like that.  Nike is cancelling a limited-edition batch of overpriced running shoes.    Deleting a line of shoes that nobody had even heard of 2 weeks ago is certainly not in the same discussion as tearing down statues of John A MacDonald or Robert E Lee.

Certainly the ugly parts of our history need to be remembered and discussed. The heel of someone's shoe is not the right place for that discussion.  This is an issue of Nike's branding, not of remembering our history.

A piece of context that has been missing from most of this discussion is WHY Kaepernick objected to the shoes and why Nike changed their mind about releasing them.  It's not simply that the Betsy Ross flag was in use during the early days of the US when slavery was still legal.  It's that the Betsy Ross flag has been adopted by some far-right and white-power groups. And that is why Nike changed their mind about associating themselves with it.


Why do rednecks, far-right, and white-power groups like the Betsy Ross flag?  About the same reason they like the Confederate flag, the Gadsden ("Don't Tread On Me") flag, or in Canada the Red Ensign.  They like these old-time flags because they represent a time before the liberals ruined everything with their ideas of civil rights for women and homos and colored-folk.

 -k





Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline Poonlight Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3805
Why do rednecks, far-right, and white-power groups like the Betsy Ross flag?  About the same reason they like the Confederate flag, the Gadsden ("Don't Tread On Me") flag, or in Canada the Red Ensign.  They like these old-time flags because they represent a time before the liberals ruined everything with their ideas of civil rights for women and homos and colored-folk.

That's true, but it also doesn't mean the Gadsden flag or Red Ensign or Betsy Ross flag should be primarily associated with these nutty groups.  It's obviously a much different thing than the confederate flag, where the confederacy's primary purpose of existence was to defend the right to hold slaves.

Nike banning the Betsy Ross flag is like that Sir John A pub in Kingston changing its name.  Sure its up to the business but it's still dumb mission-creep and sets precedents others will follow and others will feel emboldened to try to enforce. Luckily we live in a free capitalist society and consumers will reign in the end, but we can still have an opinion on it.
"The child who is not embraced by the village will burn it down to feel its warmth"  - African proverb
Agree Agree x 2 View List

Offline Poonlight Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3805
Yes of course we have done well and so good for us we can rest on our laurels to a point. What I disagree with is, especially in the US, that people like to dismiss the fact that the basis of their wealth came from the backs of slaves.

The basis of some of their wealth, especially earlier on, yes for sure.  The north still did very well after banning slavery, and the US as a whole did very well post-civil war.  A massive landmass rich with resources and so temperate and habitable it could easily accommodate far more people & expansion than any other western country did benefit well from slavery but was not at its mercy.

"The child who is not embraced by the village will burn it down to feel its warmth"  - African proverb

Offline Omni

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6913
The basis of some of their wealth, especially earlier on, yes for sure.  The north still did very well after banning slavery, and the US as a whole did very well post-civil war.  A massive landmass rich with resources and so temperate and habitable it could easily accommodate far more people & expansion than any other western country did benefit well from slavery but was not at its mercy.

Um, who's mercy were slaves at? And even after slavery was legally banned in the north it effectively carried on for a number of years.