# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Sports, like every element of society, have always been political. In particular, sports in America have been inseparable from race relations and the push for equality, first acting as preludes for the Jim Crow era and then the Civil Rights Movement. As sports once again have become the battleground for racial justice, it is crucial to remind ourselves of the Jackie Robinson era and the limitations of the Black athlete when constrained by white power structures.

It is well-known that Black people were largely banned from sports until the late 1940s, but the extent of this ban is rarely discussed. In the early days of professional sports, the bans were unofficial, resting on the idea that Black athletes would understand these leagues were not for them. Whenever Black athletes showed promise, demonstrating they possessed skills beyond those of white people, they were barred from these activities. In the early years of horse racing, Black jockeys dominated, but they were slowly weaned out of the sport, with the final Black jockey appearing in a race in 1920. Likewise, Black football players demonstrated great skill in the early days, but only a handful managed to play in the American Professional Football Association, and all were dismissed from the league by 1934. The story of baseball's segregation is much the same, as is that of basketball and most other sports.

In the late 1800s and early 1900s, as the dust from the Civil War slowly settled, white Americans, realizing that Black people were not content with no longer being in physical chains, set out to clamp them with invisible ones, and all too frequently individual Black people were charged with the burden of this oppression. In 1910, Black boxing champion Jack Johnson defeated white boxer James Jeffries, who wanted to face Johnson to demonstrate the superiority of the white race. sparking riots across the country and leading to the eventual sentencing of Johnson for illegally carrying a white woman-his wife-across state lines, violating the Mann Act. Ministers in the South called for Johnson's lynching, and a number of states who did not already have miscegenation bans introduced legislation to adopt them.[1] Black people across America suffered because Johnson beat a white man.

In 1936, Jesse Owens won four Olympic gold medals, becoming a symbol of America's strength over Nazi Germany. But Jesse Owens, the Black man in America, benefitted from none of this success and descended into poverty. Nobody followed through on their promise to offer him a job, and he was forced to race against horses prior to Negro Leagues games as a marketing ploy. When white people remembered his existence it was only to discuss him as one of the "good" Black people, who, though frequently endorsing politicians, refused to freely discuss the politics of race. Owens was useful to them when they could use him to criticize other Black people and invisible to them when they could not. As race relations became more dire in the 1940s and there emerged plenty of white people who represented American strength in the face of fascism, Owens sank farther into the background.[2]

White Americans have been accepting of Black people into the realm of sports until they feel threatened by the notion of equality. Banning Black people from sports was meant to directly reinforce systemic white supremacy, and making Black athletes like Jack Johnson the cause of Black suffering was aimed toward limiting the participation of Black people in these sports in the future. But as white athletes faced the calls of war, Black athletes began to sniff around professional white leagues.

Integration
Several sports integrated in the mid 1940s, as the country was recovering from World War II and these sports required players. As a whole, Black players gained numerous rights during the war, having been admitted into the American Labor Federation, and having created the NAACP and the Congress of Racial Equality. At the time, the pinnacle of integration occurred in baseball, and much of the Black community sought solace and strength in these Black ballplayers' achievements.

The National Football League opened up integration in 1946, when the now-Los Angeles Rams signed UCLA players Kenny Washington and Woody Strode. The NBA followed suit four years later when the Boston Celtics drafted Chuck Cooper in the second round. Also in 1950, Althea Gibson became the first Black tennis player to compete in the U.S. Championships. While each of these integrations was momentous in its own right and meant much to the Black community, the sports and leagues were all new compared to professional baseball. Integration was largely waved off as a promotional tool, and so the contributions of each of these athletes to society was limited.

The more overwhelming change occurred with baseball's integration a year later, when Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier, a moment that is commonly understood as a spark that lit the Civil Rights Movement. Now trying to assume title as the leader of the free world, in opposition to the USSR, America struggled internally with racial divisions that threatened to subvert this position, and baseball, which had become intertwined with every aspect of American identity and had long been heralded as a bastion of democratic thought, housed this fight. Black people, eager to capitalize on the success of the Negro Leagues and the freedom acquired by them during the war, viewed baseball's integration as a means of establishing themselves as legitimate members of American democracy.

White liberals fighting for racial justice latched onto baseball as a vehicle through which they could obtain equality. An editorial published in the Sporting News declared that "baseball in the south, no less than the north - should recognize no limitations of race, creed or color," and many noted that the introduction of Black players increased the overall level of the game.[3]

Robinson also quickly became a rallying point for Black Americans and particularly other Black athletes. Unlike white writers who either railed against it or largely ignored it, Black sportswriters wrote continuously of Robinson's success, using baseball's integration to argue for total integration in all areas of society.[4] Future baseball players and other athletes looked to Robinson as an example of the dignity and power of Black people.

Unsurprisingly, though, Jackie Robinson and his Black contemporaries faced swift, violent backlash. Robinson's teammate, Dixie Walker, was an early opponent of Robinson's, requesting to be traded rather than play with a Black man. Phillies manager, Ben Chapman, repeatedly referred to Robinson as "gorilla-like," and both the Pirates and Cardinals considered striking rather than being forced to play against the Dodgers.[5] Other teams instructed their players to throw at his head or spike him on the bases. Early in his career, white players made known their displeasure at his existence.

Nonetheless, Robinson succeeded, capturing Sporting News's Rookie of the Year award and opening the door for the slow integration of other black players. The following year, President Truman integrated the military, and Robinson cemented himself as a true star of the game. America was beginning to integrate in many areas, and Robinson's name would be at the forefront for decades to come.

The Aftermath
It took twelve years for baseball to fully integrate, by which point Jackie Robinson had retired. Though he remained a figurehead of the Civil Rights Movement, appearing alongside Martin Luther King Jr. on occasion, the sporting world plodded along without him, mired by the same racism he had spent his career fighting. States began reasserting discrimination through legal means, and though Black athletes continued to bolster the Civil Rights Movement, they received few allies and were ultimately unable to achieve full equality.

As they had with Robinson and Owens, white people begrudgingly accepted a small number of black athletes in sports, so long as they remained model athletes who rarely discussed racism. Many white people viewed the signing of Jackie Robinson as the end of racism in sports and became enraged by Black athletes re-politicizing sports and continuing to advocate for further changes. These athletes also had to depend on white owners, coaches, and benefactors, many of whom were also unwilling to put up with political athletes, and so activism among athletes dwindled.

Jim Brown, one of the greatest running backs of all-time, constantly had his talents diminished because of his dedication to the Civil Rights Movement. Tommy Smith and John Carlos were suspended from the US Olympic team in 1968 after doing Black Power salutes on the podium. Dick Allen was traded from the Phillies to the Cardinals in 1970 because of his divisive politics. This trend of curbing Black athletes' participation in the Civil Rights Movement continued for decades and remains a component of professional sports to this day.

As the Civil Rights Movement waned in the 1970s, the white-run sports leagues made a concerted effort to "depoliticize" their sports, and Black athletes rarely found allies in their white teammates. As a result, while athletes in individual sports, like Muhammed Ali, more freely spoke about politics, team sport athletes were largely curbed from doing so. In the '70s and '80s, MLB and the NFL turned into thriving businesses whose owners not only skewed conservative, but were wary of doing anything to lose money. Politically-minded athletes thus risked not only their careers (which were already relatively short) but the owners' franchises if they took a political stand. As a result, Black athletes no longer rallied around their peers in different sports, because they were far too concerned with maintaining a position in their own league.

The NBA, meanwhile, recruited more Black players during these decades, many of whom followed in Bill Russell's footsteps as a civil rights activist. Protected by the sheer number of Black players as well as the existence of teams in more liberal areas of the country, NBA players more freely voiced their political opinions than did athletes of other sports. Though Bill Russell, like Jackie Robinson, was the figurehead of the NBA's civil rights discourse, he was not alone, as all the game's Black stars-of which there were many-joined him. Because the NBA's success depended on these early giants, it could not and was unwilling to curb the political actions of its players. The legacy of these early activists carried on through the decades, and though stars like Michael Jordan and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar were not as vocal, the league itself remained the most liberal of the major sports.[6]

However, in America as a whole, many willfully ignorant white people mistakenly believed the passing of the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, and the Fair Housing Act in the 1960s moved the country into a post-racial society. But in the ensuing decades, the war on Black people merely assumed less overt appearances, moving from outright segregation to economic and social fronts, such as the war on drugs. With racism now hidden from white people who did not want to find it, sports became again a form of strict entertainment, a refuge from politics.

The Civil Rights Movement largely began due to integration movements in sports, and when the Movement petered out, so did much of the civil rights discourse among athletes. Though Black athletes made great strides, first in integration and then in slowly raising their salaries, they continue to find themselves at a disadvantage. They have much to gain from political activism, but the white-run leagues and organizations believe they have nothing to gain and everything to lose in allowing their athletes to discuss politics.

In September of last year, Colin Kaepernick refused to stand for the National Anthem, using this display as a means of protesting the continued oppression of people of color. People across sports spoke out against this action, charging Kaepernick with showing disrespect to the country, the flag, and the military. His actions undoubtedly cost him a job for this current NFL season, and launched the sporting world into a political fervor not seen since the integration movements of the 1940s. On Saturday, a day after blasting the NFL and Kaepernick at a rally in Alabama, President Trump again stoked the flames, tweeting: "If a player wants the privilege of making millions of dollars in the NFL,or other leagues, he or she should not be allowed to disrespect our Great American Flag (or Country) and should stand for the National Anthem. If not, YOU'RE FIRED. Find something else to do!" Throughout the day, athletes from various sports responded to Donald Trump, making clear the connection between sports and politics, and placing sports at the forefront of another civil rights movement.

NBA players and coaches over the past year and a half have not been shy about criticizing Donald Trump's sexist, racist rhetoric. Following the election, coaches Stan Van Gundy, Steve Kerr, and Greg Popovich, among many others, voiced their displeasure in Trump's victory, and players and coaches alike have continued to do so for the duration of the administration. Kaepernick received support from a number of players following his protest, including Martellus Bennett and Brandon Marshall. And this past weekend, MLB joined in when Oakland A's rookie catcher Bruce Maxwell knelt for the National Anthem and the organization itself tweeted support of this action.

Not since the time of Jackie Robinson have athletes from a wide array of sports rallied around one figure's civil rights activism, but as evidenced from the '70s and '80s, it takes more than a diverse array of Black athletes to achieve sustained and impactful success in civil rights matters. These athletes need white allies. And so far, several have stepped to the plate. In the NFL, Chris Long, Justin Britt, Derek Carr, and Seth DeValve have all expressed support, and US Women's Soccer star Megan Rapinoe knelt in solidarity last September.

In this day, athletes are able to communicate directly to fans, making their messages more effective and immediate, and many athletes across many prominent sports are using social media to convey political messages. Both LeBron James and Steph Curry frequently tweet their displeasure with the current administration and their support of civil rights organizations, while Chris Long and Martellus Bennett do the same, bridging the divide between the two sports. And Major League Baseball also has its representatives, namely Washington Nationals' pitcher Sean Doolittle, who today tweeted in response to Trump's attack on the NFL and Kaepernick that "i don't think anyone can tell athletes to 'stick to sports' for a while."

Indeed, this administration is making it more apparent than ever that all sports are political, and athletes have increasingly begun to use their platforms to voice support for civil rights. It is now up to fans to follow in these athletes' footsteps and pressure more white athletes and more organizations to do the same. It is imperative to provide Black athletes with white allies and to force white-run organizations to view these players as human beings worthy of protection. Without a faithful watchdog, Black Americans will continue to have their rights violated and society will continue to regress to a point where Black people were seen by all as secondary.

For over a century Black athletes have existed in accordance with the whims of white owners and fans, but the actions of Kaepernick and his supporters are poised to give back Black people's autonomy, and for those who have exploited them for decades, it is a moral imperative to ensure this movement is far more successful than the last. Unlike with the shortcomings of the 1960s Civil Rights Movement, today there are no excuses. These athletes have been shouting their concerns and it is up to us to listen and to act. There is no more denying that sports are political, and if the kneeling of a group of players during the anthem disturbs you not on behalf of them but on behalf of a cheap piece of foreign fabric, you do not get to call yourself a fan of theirs. You do not get to exploit them for your own delight without sharing in their hardships. You do not get to exert a moral or intellectual superiority over those whose oppression you have aided.

Notes:

[1] Carrie Teresa, "'We Needed a Booker T. Washington  ...  and Certainly a Jack Johnson': The Black Press, Johnson, and Issues of Representation, 1909-1915," American Journalism 32, no. 1 ( 2015): 23-40.

[2] Jacqueline Edmondson, Jesse Owens: A Biography, (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2007).

[3] Patrick J. Harrigan, "Baseball in Postwar American Society," in The Detroit Tigers: Club and Community, 1945-1995, (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997), 9-39.

[4] Chris Lamb and Glen L. Blesky, "Democracy on the Field: The Black Press Take on White Baseball," in From Jack Johnson to LeBron James: Sports, Media, and the Color Line (Omaha: University of Nebraska Press, 2016), 148-169.

[5] Harrigan, 26.

[6] Aram Goudsouzian, "Bill Russell and the Basketball Revolution." American Studies 47, no. 3/4 (2006): 61-85.
Mary Craig is a baseball history enthusiast who writes about the sport's relation to America's political history. You can follow her on Twitter at .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Baseball's integration and the contemporary civil rights movement

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Perhaps the greatest intersection of sports and politics in American history, the integration of baseball and its aftermath can shed light on the current politicization of sports.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
| Clip Of Negro Leagues Baseball

Bob Kendrick, president and CEO of the Negro Leagues Baseball Museum discussed the impact that Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier in baseball in 1947 on the Civil Rights Movement.

Report Video Issue

Javascript must be enabled in order to access C-SPAN videos.

Related Video

Slavery at Thomas Jefferson's Monticello

Christa Dierksheide, Gardiner Hallock, and Steve Light showed some of the renovations taking place to Thomas Jefferson's Monticello. The...

Devery Anderson talked about his book, Emmett Till: The Murder That Shocked the World and Propelled the Civil Rights...

Settled in 1639, Newport, Rhode Island, was the largest slave trade port in North America. Keith Stokes, vice president of the 1696...

George McDanile spoke about Drayton Hall plantation, the changing fortunes of the Drayton family after the Civil War, and the philosophy...

User Created Clips from This Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Jackie Robinson's Impact on the Civil Rights Movement

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Clip Of Negro Leagues Baseball Bob Kendrick, president and CEO of the Negro Leagues Baseball Museum discussed the impact that Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier in baseball in 1947 on the Civil Rights Movement. Report Video Issue Javascript must be enabled in order to access C-SPAN videos.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Protesting in American sports over civil rights issues is ingrained into our culture. From Jesse Owens' four gold medals in the Nazi-hosted 1936 Olympics in Berlin to Jackie Robinson entering baseball, even the presence of black athletes in major sports became a protest in itself. Owens was initially set to boycott the Berlin Olympics because of the Nazi regime, but was ultimately convinced not to by the president of the American Olympic Committee called those pushing the boycott, "un-American agitators." As long as protest of racial discrimination has existed, there has been a strong backlash from those who call it an attack on an idealized concept of America. This parallel counter-protest movement often decides the protests real purpose is dividing or hurting the amorphous essence of the country and creating racial tension, instead of engaging with the protest in good faith. In an increasingly segmented world, sports is a rare collectivist activity, and a natural platform to build solidarity, despite its tribalist elements. It's also an arena in which humans physically, emotionally and idealistically clash in person, when few such outlets exist in general society.

The amount of attention on professional and elite amateur athletes gives them the ability to start conversations which reach across all sorts of identity and idealogical divides. Where those conversations go after they enter public consumption (no matter how far they stray from the original message or debate) can never negate the immense power athletes have from their platform to get out messages to the masses. In an era of instant communication, anyone's voice can be amplified, but the saturation of signal can make it harder to get a point across.

Ever since former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick first protested the oppression of colored people in 2016 by refusing to stand for the national anthem, a national debate over injustice, racism, patriotism and protesting in sports has been ignited in America. Like many contentious issues that have become part of mainstream conversation, Kaepernick's protest has been co-opted, spun and twisted by a 24/7 media machine that reflexively devoured the story, only to discard it, then pick it back up when it fit another convenient narrative.

In fact, Kaepernick wasn't even the first NFL player in recent history to protest civil rights disparities in America. Two years before his protest, after Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager was shot and killed by police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, St. Louis, five St. Louis Rams players (Tavon Austin, Kenny Britt, Jared Cook, Chris Givens and Stedman Bailey) protested a grand jury's decision not to indict Wilson by coming out of the field with their hands raised in the air. Their reference to "hands up, don't shoot" was immediately rebuked by the St. Louis Police Officer's Association, who demanded the NFL discipline the players, saying their, "...gesture has become synonymous with assertions that Michael Brown was innocent of any wrongdoing."

"No matter what happened on that day, no matter how the whole situation went down, there has to be a change," Cook said at the time.

Two years before that, Lebron James, Dwayne Wade and other NBA players wore hoods partially covering their faces in a social media post to protest the killing of another unarmed black teenager, Trayvon Martin. And two years before that there had been officially sanctioned protest in the NBA of anti-immigration/racial profiling laws by the Phoenix Suns and San Antonio Spurs, who wore jerseys with their team name in Spanish to show support for immigrant communities in their cities and states. But no protest in recent history has had the lasting impact of Kaepernick's.

Kaepernick first sat down during the anthem in the 2016 preseason. For the first two games, his protest went unnoticed. Kaepernick wasn't dressed to play during those games, but in the third he was, and the protest became making news. After his protest was conflated with anti-American, or anti-military sentiment (among the first twists of his protest to meet a narrative), he spoke with former Green Beret and one-time NFL long snapper Nate Boyer, and decided to take a knee instead:

"We were talking to [Boyer] about how can we get the message back on track and not take away from the military, not take away from fighting for our country, but keep the focus on what the issues really are. And as we talked about it, we came up with taking a knee. Because there are issues that still need to be addressed and it was also a way to show more respect to the men and women who fight for this country."

As we examine the history of civil rights protesting in sports, it's important to remember why this protest began, through the words of the man who started it:

"I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color," Kaepernick initially said of his protest. "To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder."

Later, responding to criticism that his protest was anti-patriotic, or harmed the American military, Kaepernick said:

"I have great respect for the men and women that have fought for this country. I have family, I have friends that have gone and fought for this country. And they fight for freedom, they fight for the people, they fight for liberty and justice, for everyone. That's not happening. People are dying in vain because this country isn't holding their end of the bargain up, as far as giving freedom and justice, liberty to everybody. That's something that's not happening. I've seen videos, I've seen circumstances where men and women that have been in the military have come back and been treated unjustly by the country they fought have for, and have been murdered by the country they fought for, on our land. That's not right."

In what appears to be a concerted effort by the NFL owners, Kaepernick wasn't signed by any team after opting out of his contract with San Francisco following the 2016 season. Despite completing passes at a higher clip, posting more rushing yards, and placing in the top ten in the league with a low interception rate, Kaepernick received no contract to play in the NFL. Many analysts have ruled this a decision to blackball him over his political protest.

Since he first protested, Kaepernick has inspired fellow NFL players, NCAA athletes, high school athletes and even professional women's soccer players to follow suit. Many of these athletes have been pressured by ownership, fans, pundits and more to abandon their protest. Kaepernick serves as a reminder to athletes across the globe of what can be taken from them if they're unwilling to follow norms defined by owners, politicians, and their fellow citizens.

Kaepernick filed a grievance against the NFL, accusing the owners of colluding to keep him from playing. His lawyer, Mark Geragos, explained the decision, saying, "If the NFL ... is to remain a meritocracy, then principled and peaceful protest - which the owners themselves made great theater imitating weeks ago - should not be punished and athletes should not be denied employment based on partisan political provocation by the Executive Branch of our government."

Geragos was referencing the 2017 muddying of Kaepernick's protest by Trump, who publicly attacked the civil rights protesting in the NFL, both on Twitter and most notably at a rally in Alabama in September. "Wouldn't you love to see one of these NFL owners, when somebody disrespects our flag, to say, 'Get that son of a bitch off the field right now. Out! He's fired. He's fired!'" Trump said. Trump's attacks on NFL protesters prompted further protest, including the cynical participation of some NFL owners. Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones stood with players in a perceived sign of unity before later ordering them not to protest further. New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft issued a statement on the protests, saying, "I think our political leaders could learn a lot from the lessons of teamwork and the importance of working together toward a common goal. Our players are intelligent, thoughtful, and care deeply about our community, and I support their right to peacefully affect social change and raise awareness in a manner that they feel is impactful." And most recently, Houston Texans owner Bob McNair said of the protests, "we can't have the inmates running the prison," sparking the majority of the Texans' players to kneel at their next game.

As the owners, more players, the president and the public became increasingly involved in the situation, Kaepernick's initial reason for protesting, the systemic oppression of people of color was swept away in the national conversation. Increasingly, the debate around the protests became part of the national debate over Trump. This subversion of the protest echoes the past, and raises the question, what are the laws that govern protest in America?

The American Constitution doesn't specifically grant the right to protest. What it does grant is freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and the right to petition the government. It doesn't specifically mention freedom of association, but the United States Supreme Court found that association is in many cases the only effective mechanism by which people can exercise their freedom of speech in NAACP v. Alabama (1958). However, there are limits on peaceful protest, and freedom of speech in general. American governmental bodies are allowed to put limits on the time, place and manner of peaceful protest. This sets up an inherent conflict, where in the case of protests of systemic racial injustice by police and government, those being protested have power to deny the protest itself. These waters are murky, and have resulted in countless clashes between protesters and police.

The difference between protesting while representing one's country as an Olympian, or doing so as an employee gets into the corrosive nature of capital. There are very few, mostly identity-based laws that bar an employer may from punishing or discriminating against an employee. There is no freedom of speech in the private sector, although there is in the public sector. In a work at will of the employer landscape, there's very few exceptions under which an employers can't punish or terminate an employee. However, over time there's been a shift in the severity of consequences for athletes who engage in protest. For example, Kaepernick is the only recent example of a qualified athlete who has been clearly and publicly barred from his sport over his protest. It's unclear if that ban will last, but it echoes previous attempts to silence protest from athletes.

Muhammad Ali was stripped of his boxing license after he refused to be drafted into the Vietnam War on conscientious objection grounds. conscientious objector. "War is against the teachings of the Qur'an. I'm not trying to dodge the draft. We are not supposed to take part in no wars unless declared by Allah or The Messenger. We don't take part in Christian wars or wars of any unbelievers," Ali said in 1966, describing his decision. Not only did Ali lose his boxing license, and thus his main source of income, but he was convicted of a felony. In 1971 that conviction was overturned by the Supreme Court in a unanimous decision. However, the decision found that because there was no reason given for why Ali was denied a conscientious objector exemption, his conviction had to be reversed. There was no further affirmation of his speech, nor the impact it had on his ability to earn money.

If your speech results in the inability to provide for yourself and family, is it free? Clearly there are lines beyond which a specific employer can tolerate speech from a specific employee, but far more often than not an employer can punish or terminate an employee based on any grounds, or without even presenting a reason. There are no clear boundaries between inappropriate speech that precludes someone from employment, and a human's ability to express themselves with the expectation they'll still be able to earn a living after doing so.

Even in cases where an athlete is under amateur status (and is nominally unpaid for their performance), they can be disciplined over speech and protest. In 1968, Tommie Smith and John Carlos placed first and third respectively in the 200-meter race at the Summer Olympics in Mexico City. When they stood on the platform to receive their medals, the two appeared shoeless, wearing black socks, and held up black gloved fists while the Star Spangled Banner played. The protest was largely interpreted as a show of solidarity with organizations like the Black Panthers, and other civil rights liberation movements of the time. Smith later wrote that the gesture wasn't a "Black Power" salute, but a "human rights salute."

The International Olympic Committee president Avery Brundage decided that this statement was unfit for the Olympics, and ordered that Smith and Carlos be suspended from the US track & field team, and kicked out of the Olympic Village. The US Olympic Committee refused to comply, and Brundage threatened to ban their entire track team in response. This threat led to Smith and Carlos being ejected from the 1968 Olympics. An IOC spokesman called Smith and Carlos' protest, "a deliberate and violent breach of the fundamental principles of the Olympic spirit." Brundage was the president of the United States Olympic Committee in 1936, and had no objection to the Nazi salutes at those games. In explanation, Brundage claimed the Nazi salute was the national salute at the time, which was acceptable in the context of international competition, whereas Carlos and Smith's salute represented no nation. Brundage's tenure as IOC president ended four years later in 1972, and was one of three goals of the one of the three stated objectives of the Olympic Project for Human Rights, an organization founded by sociologist Harry Edwards and joined by Smith and Carlos. To this day, Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter says: "No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas." Carlos and Smith returned home to support from many Americans, and widespread disdain, especially in national coverage of the fallout from their protest. In just one example Time magazine replaced the Olympic slogan "Faster, Higher, Stronger," with "Angrier, Nastier, Uglier" to discredit the two runners.

Often, those that advocate free speech believe in it for themselves, not their political opponents. Accusations of anti-semitism and Nazi sympathy dogged Brundage, and may serve as an explanation of his preference for certain types of speech. People calling for unchecked freedom of speech frequently celebrate the firing of someone who said things they disagree with, but will fervently protest that treatment of their idealogical peers.

Capitalism decides the value of people based on their identity and ideas. That value is determined by many factors, but chief among them is perceived profit, and holding no concept or human right over it. This system rejects change because it knows where it leads. The fight for human rights and the victories it claims inevitably means the loss of capital for those that have accumulated the most of it, and its redistribution among the people, whether in the form of money or entrenched human rights that prohibit continued, expanding exploitation by ownership.

Some of the people who were disgusted with Kaepernick's protest argued that people paid millions of dollars to play sports shouldn't be complaining about inequality. But once again, they ignore the point of Kaepernick's protest, which was expressly in solidarity with the oppression and brutality of people of color. There's a difference between the power that a millionaire athlete commands in speech and action, and the reality-shifting power exercised by billionaires while forming society around everyone in their image. The former has a chance at creating change, while the latter institutes controls to maintain its position through every level of society.

No matter your politics, engaging with speech in good faith and not cynically recasting it into an existing narrative is essential to human development. Kaepernick went further in explaining his protest in August 2016, saying:

"I'm going to continue to stand with the people that are being oppressed. To me, this is something that has to change. When there's significant change and I feel that flag represents what it's supposed to represent, and this country is representing people the way that it's supposed to, I'll stand."

"This stand wasn't for me. This is because I'm seeing things happen to people that don't have a voice, people that don't have a platform to talk and have their voices heard, and effect change. So I'm in the position where I can do that and I'm going to do that for people that can't."

"It's something that can unify this team. It's something that can unify this country. If we have these real conversations that are uncomfortable for a lot of people. If we have these conversations, there's a better understanding of where both sides are coming from."

There will be more Kaepernick's, and more consequences for them. And there will be more protest, and speech, that crosses boundaries or muddies lines of what constitutes protected speech, both in sports and outside of it. Because sports capture the imagination and dedication of such wide swathes of society, it will always be a hotbed and driving force in discussions of civil and human rights. To ignore or oppose this reality is intrinsically resisting ontological reactions to oppression and violations of human rights by those victimized by them, or who notice the victims of them wherever they go. Kaepernick and his fellow athlete protesters have often been called selfish for their stances by their opposition. Yet a consistent theme throughout these protests are tangible consequences for the protesters, who often aren't faced with the exact same realities as those they speak out on behalf of, showing clear solidarity with the rights of others through their actions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
History of Civil Rights Protests in Sports - Sports Management Degree Hub

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Protesting in American sports over civil rights issues is ingrained into our culture. From Jesse Owens' four gold medals in the Nazi-hosted 1936 Olympics in Berlin to Jackie Robinson entering baseball, even the presence of black athletes in major sports became a protest in itself.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
0:00 / 0:30•Watch full video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Famous Malcolm X speech "Any means necessary"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Civil Rights and the 1950s: Crash Course US History #39

# data[].attributes.body
A Change is Gonna Come

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The American Civil Rights Movement in the late 1950s and 1960s represents a pivotal event in world history. The positive changes it brought to voting and civil rights continue to be felt throughout the United States and much of the world. Although this struggle for Black equality was fought on hundreds of different "battlefields" throughout the United States, many observers at the time described the state of Mississippi as the most racist and violent.

Mississippi's lawmakers, law enforcement officers, public officials, and private citizens worked long and hard to maintain the segregated way of life that had dominated the state since the end of the Civil War in 1865. The method that ensured segregation persisted was the use and threat of violence against people who sought to end it.

Philosophy of nonviolence

In contrast, the leaders of the Civil Rights Movement chose the tactic of nonviolence as a tool to dismantle institutionalized racial segregation, discrimination, and inequality. Indeed, they followed Martin Luther King Jr.'s guiding principles of nonviolence and passive resistance. Civil rights leaders had long understood that segregationists would go to any length to maintain their power and control over African Americans. Consequently, they believed some changes might be made if enough people outside the South witnessed the violence African Americans had experienced for decades.

According to Bob Moses and other civil rights activists, they hoped and often prayed that television and newspaper reporters would show the world that the primary reason African Americans remained in such a subordinate position in the South was because of widespread violence directed against them. History shows there was no shortage of violence to attract the media.

History of violence

In 1955, Reverend George Lee, vice president of the Regional Council of Negro Leadership and NAACP worker, was shot in the face and killed for urging African Americans in the Mississippi Delta to vote. Although eyewitnesses saw a carload of White people drive by and shoot into Lee's automobile, the authorities failed to charge anyone. Governor Hugh White refused requests to send investigators to Belzoni, Mississippi, where the murder occurred.

In August 1955, Lamar Smith, sixty-three-year-old farmer and World War II veteran, was shot in cold blood on the crowded courthouse lawn in Brookhaven, Mississippi, for urging African Americans to vote. In Local People, John Dittmer writes "although the sheriff saw a white man leaving the scene 'with blood all over him' no one admitted to having witnessed the shooting" and "the killer went free."

On September 25, 1961, farmer Herbert Lee was shot and killed in Liberty, Mississippi, by E.H. Hurst, a member of the Mississippi State Legislature. Hurst murdered Lee because of his participation in the voter registration campaign sweeping through southwest Mississippi. Authorities never charged him with the crime. According to Charles Payne in his book, I've Got the Light of Freedom, "black witnesses had been pressured by the sheriff and others to testify that Lee tried to hit Hurst with a tire tool. They testified as ordered. Hurst was acquitted by a coroner's jury, held in a room full of armed white men, the same day as the killing. Hurst never spent a night in jail."

NAACP State Director Medgar Evers was gunned down in 1963 in his Jackson driveway by rifle-wielding White Citizens Council member Byron De La Beckwith from Greenwood, Mississippi.

Chaney, Goodman, and Schwerner

Perhaps the most notable episode of violence came in Freedom Summer of 1964, when civil rights activists James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, and Michael Schwerner left their base in Meridian, Mississippi, to investigate one of a number of church burnings in the eastern part of the state. The Ku Klux Klan had burned Mount Zion Church because the minister had allowed it to be used as a meeting place for civil rights activists. After the three young men had gone into Neshoba County to investigate, they were subsequently stopped and arrested by Neshoba County Deputy Sheriff Cecil Price. After several hours, Price finally released them only to arrest them again shortly after 10 p.m. He then turned the civil rights workers over to his fellow Klansmen. The group took the activists to a remote area, beat them, and then shot them to death. Dittmer suggests that because Schwerner and Goodman were White the federal government responded by establishing an FBI office in Jackson and calling out the Mississippi National Guard and U. S. Navy to help search for the three men. Of course this was the response the Freedom Summer organizers had hoped for when they asked for White volunteers.

After several weeks of searching and recovering more than a dozen other bodies, the authorities finally found the civil rights workers buried under an earthen dam. Seven Klansmen, including Price, were arrested and tried for the brutal killings. A jury of sympathizers found them all not guilty. Some time later, the federal government charged the murderers with violating the civil rights of Goodman, Schwerner, and Chaney. This time the Klansmen were convicted and served sentences ranging from two to ten years.

In addition to these murders, violence persisted through mass arrests, jail beatings, lynchings, and church bombings. Eventually, national public exposure brought about substantive change. Once the cameras began to capture incidents similar to the ones described here, progress in the movement became a reality. President John F. Kennedy, and later President Lyndon Johnson, moved to put a halt to at least some of the violence by supporting the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Arms in defense

Nonetheless, many African Americans had already taken it upon themselves to defend their lives and property with whatever weapons they could muster. Despite their adherence to the philosophy of nonviolence, Black Mississippians understood too well the implications of not being armed to defend their lives and property. Civil rights workers throughout the state set up around-the-clock surveillance of some of the churches and homes they used as meeting places. As far as they were concerned, not striking back while participating in a public protest was quite different from not defending one's home, church, or community center from imminent attack.

Griffin McLaurin, a Covington County activist, recalled his experiences for the University of Southern Mississippi's Center for Oral History. He said civil rights activists "were guarding all of our houses" and "we formed a little group that was patrolling the community and keeping an eye on our community center." McLaurin noted that there was still plenty of fear because they received threats on their lives every day. He added that although individual citizens and racist groups like the Ku Klux Klan "blew up a lot of cars on the road going to the center," they did not succeed in bombing it because they kept a 24-hour watch on the building. McLaurin stated that "they'd come in late at night and try to get to the center, but we had our guards. We stood our ground, and whenever we heard something that we thought wasn't right, we had our firepower."

Walter Bruce, a Durant native and former chair of the Holmes County Freedom Democratic Party, told the Center for Oral History the story of how "fighting fire with fire" was the only way many African Americans and their supporters were able to survive the sixties.

Bruce:
"Well, our strategy was we always did carry our weapons out there. . . .And so, when they came over that Wednesday night and started to shooting, and when they got down there about half a mile, our people opened fire on them. And so, they turned around, and come back that a-way. And when they come back that a-way, the people on that side started shooting over they heads. And [when they] got in town, they said, "We not going to go back out there no more." And said "Them niggers got all kinds of machine guns out there."...and that word got out, and so from then on we never had no more problems when we'd go out there [with] nobody coming by shooting no more. So that broke that up."

From these examples it is clear that many African Americans used the term and tactic of nonviolence quite loosely. Their public stance was undoubtedly necessary to attract supporters and to compel government action, while the more private reliance on armed self-defense was a reality that few activists shunned.

The larger Civil Rights Movement can attribute its success to the tactic of nonviolence contrasting with the exposure of violence-prone policemen, sheriffs, vigilante groups, and other defenders of the status quo. Yet, the tactic of armed self-defense was indispensable in order to protect lives and property since the courts and law enforcement officials often stood silent or protected the perpetrators of racist violence. Thus, African Americans and their supporters were compelled to fight the evils of segregation with nonviolence as well as with force. While this may seem paradoxical, it worked to advance their struggle for freedom, equality, and justice.
Curtis J. Austin, Ph.D., is professor of history at the University of Southern Mississippi.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
On Violence and Nonviolence: The Civil Rights Movement in Mississippi

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The American Civil Rights Movement in the late 1950s and 1960s represents a pivotal event in world history. The positive changes it brought to voting and civil rights continue to be felt throughout the United States and much of the world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When police viciously attacked a peaceful civil rights march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama March 7, 1965 the pivotal moment in American history became known as "Bloody Sunday." The Steven Kasher Gallery in New York has put together a comprehensive exhibition showcasing the work of three photographers of the era - Spider Martin, Charles Moore and James Barker - commemorating the three historic marches of 1965 on the 50 th anniversary.

# data[].attributes.body
History of the Movement

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Jim Crow Laws

During Reconstruction, Black people took on leadership roles like never before. They held public office and sought legislative changes for equality and the right to vote.

In 1868, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution gave Black people equal protection under the law. In 1870, the 15th Amendment granted Black American men the right to vote. Still, many white Americans, especially those in the South, were unhappy that people they'd once enslaved were now on a more-or-less equal playing field.

To marginalize Black people, keep them separate from white people and erase the progress they'd made during Reconstruction, " Jim Crow " laws were established in the South beginning in the late 19th century. Black people couldn't use the same public facilities as white people, live in many of the same towns or go to the same schools. Interracial marriage was illegal, and most Black people couldn't vote because they were unable to pass voter literacy tests.

Jim Crow laws weren't adopted in northern states; however, Black people still experienced discrimination at their jobs or when they tried to buy a house or get an education. To make matters worse, laws were passed in some states to limit voting rights for Black Americans.

Moreover, southern segregation gained ground in 1896 when the U.S. Supreme Court declared in Plessy v. Ferguson that facilities for Black and white people could be "separate but equal."

World War II and Civil Rights

Prior to World War II, most Black people worked as low-wage farmers, factory workers, domestics or servants. By the early 1940s, war-related work was booming, but most Black Americans weren't given better-paying jobs. They were also discouraged from joining the military.

After thousands of Black people threatened to march on Washington to demand equal employment rights, President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Executive Order 8802 on June 25, 1941. It opened national defense jobs and other government jobs to all Americans regardless of race, creed, color or national origin.

Black men and women served heroically in World War II, despite suffering segregation and discrimination during their deployment. The Tuskegee Airmen broke the racial barrier to become the first Black military aviators in the U.S. Army Air Corps and earned more than 150 Distinguished Flying Crosses. Yet many Black veterans were met with prejudice and scorn upon returning home. This was a stark contrast to why America had entered the war to begin with-to defend freedom and democracy in the world.

As the Cold War began, President Harry Truman initiated a civil rights agenda, and in 1948 issued Executive Order 9981 to end discrimination in the military. These events helped set the stage for grass-roots initiatives to enact racial equality legislation and incite the civil rights movement.

Rosa Parks

On December 1, 1955, a 42-year-old woman named Rosa Parks found a seat on a Montgomery, Alabama bus after work. Segregation laws at the time stated Black passengers must sit in designated seats at the back of the bus, and Parks complied.

When a white man got on the bus and couldn't find a seat in the white section at the front of the bus, the bus driver instructed Parks and three other Black passengers to give up their seats. Parks refused and was arrested.

As word of her arrest ignited outrage and support, Parks unwittingly became the "mother of the modern-day civil rights movement." Black community leaders formed the Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA) led by Baptist minister Martin Luther King Jr., a role which would place him front and center in the fight for civil rights.

Parks' courage incited the MIA to stage a boycott of the Montgomery bus system. The Montgomery Bus Boycott lasted 381 days. On November 14, 1956, the Supreme Court ruled segregated seating was unconstitutional.

Little Rock Nine

In 1954, the civil rights movement gained momentum when the United States Supreme Court made segregation illegal in public schools in the case of Brown v. Board of Education. In 1957, Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas asked for volunteers from all-Black high schools to attend the formerly segregated school.

On September 4, 1957, nine Black students, known as the Little Rock Nine, arrived at Central High School to begin classes but were instead met by the Arkansas National Guard (on order of Governor Orval Faubus) and a screaming, threatening mob. The Little Rock Nine tried again a couple of weeks later and made it inside, but had to be removed for their safety when violence ensued.

Finally, President Dwight D. Eisenhower intervened and ordered federal troops to escort the Little Rock Nine to and from classes at Central High. Still, the students faced continual harassment and prejudice.

Their efforts, however, brought much-needed attention to the issue of desegregation and fueled protests on both sides of the issue.

Civil Rights Act of 1957

Even though all Americans had gained the right to vote, many southern states made it difficult for Black citizens. They often required prospective voters of color to take literacy tests that were confusing, misleading and nearly impossible to pass.

Wanting to show a commitment to the civil rights movement and minimize racial tensions in the South, the Eisenhower administration pressured Congress to consider new civil rights legislation.

On September 9, 1957, President Eisenhower signed the Civil Rights Act of 1957 into law, the first major civil rights legislation since Reconstruction. It allowed federal prosecution of anyone who tried to prevent someone from voting. It also created a commission to investigate voter fraud.

Sit-In at Woolworth's Lunch Counter

Despite making some gains, Black Americans still experienced blatant prejudice in their daily lives. On February 1, 1960, four college students took a stand against segregation in Greensboro, North Carolina when they refused to leave a Woolworth's lunch counter without being served.

Over the next several days, hundreds of people joined their cause in what became known as the Greensboro sit-ins. After some were arrested and charged with trespassing, protesters launched a boycott of all segregated lunch counters until the owners caved and the original four students were finally served at the Woolworth's lunch counter where they'd first stood their ground.

Their efforts spearheaded peaceful sit-ins and demonstrations in dozens of cities and helped launch the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee to encourage all students to get involved in the civil rights movement. It also caught the eye of young college graduate Stokely Carmichael, who joined the SNCC during the Freedom Summer of 1964 to register Black voters in Mississippi. In 1966, Carmichael became the chair of the SNCC, giving his famous speech in which he originated the phrase "Black power."

Freedom Riders

On May 4, 1961, 13 " Freedom Riders"-seven Black and six white activists-mounted a Greyhound bus in Washington, D.C., embarking on a bus tour of the American south to protest segregated bus terminals. They were testing the 1960 decision by the Supreme Court in Boynton v. Virginia that declared the segregation of interstate transportation facilities unconstitutional.

Facing violence from both police officers and white protesters, the Freedom Rides drew international attention. On Mother's Day 1961, the bus reached Anniston, Alabama, where a mob mounted the bus and threw a bomb into it. The Freedom Riders escaped the burning bus but were badly beaten. Photos of the bus engulfed in flames were widely circulated, and the group could not find a bus driver to take them further. U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy (brother to President John F. Kennedy) negotiated with Alabama Governor John Patterson to find a suitable driver, and the Freedom Riders resumed their journey under police escort on May 20. But the officers left the group once they reached Montgomery, where a white mob brutally attacked the bus. Attorney General Kennedy responded to the riders-and a call from Martin Luther King Jr.-by sending federal marshals to Montgomery.

On May 24, 1961, a group of Freedom Riders reached Jackson, Mississippi. Though met with hundreds of supporters, the group was arrested for trespassing in a "whites-only" facility and sentenced to 30 days in jail. Attorneys for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People ( NAACP) brought the matter to the U.S. Supreme Court, which reversed the convictions. Hundreds of new Freedom Riders were drawn to the cause, and the rides continued.

In the fall of 1961, under pressure from the Kennedy administration, the Interstate Commerce Commission issued regulations prohibiting segregation in interstate transit terminals

March on Washington

Arguably one of the most famous events of the civil rights movement took place on August 28, 1963: the March on Washington. It was organized and attended by civil rights leaders such as A. Philip Randolph, Bayard Rustin and Martin Luther King Jr.

More than 200,000 people of all races congregated in Washington, D. C. for the peaceful march with the main purpose of forcing civil rights legislation and establishing job equality for everyone. The highlight of the march was King's speech in which he continually stated, "I have a dream..."

King's " I Have a Dream" speech galvanized the national civil rights movement and became a slogan for equality and freedom.

Civil Rights Act of 1964

President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964-legislation initiated by President John F. Kennedy before his assassination -into law on July 2 of that year.

King and other civil rights activists witnessed the signing. The law guaranteed equal employment for all, limited the use of voter literacy tests and allowed federal authorities to ensure public facilities were integrated.

Bloody Sunday

On March 7, 1965, the civil rights movement in Alabama took an especially violent turn as 600 peaceful demonstrators participated in the Selma to Montgomery march to protest the killing of Black civil rights activist Jimmie Lee Jackson by a white police officer and to encourage legislation to enforce the 15th amendment.

As the protesters neared the Edmund Pettus Bridge, they were blocked by Alabama state and local police sent by Alabama Governor George C. Wallace, a vocal opponent of desegregation. Refusing to stand down, protesters moved forward and were viciously beaten and teargassed by police and dozens of protesters were hospitalized.

The entire incident was televised and became known as " Bloody Sunday." Some activists wanted to retaliate with violence, but King pushed for nonviolent protests and eventually gained federal protection for another march.

Voting Rights Act of 1965

When President Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law on August 6, 1965, he took the Civil Rights Act of 1964 several steps further. The new law banned all voter literacy tests and provided federal examiners in certain voting jurisdictions.

It also allowed the attorney general to contest state and local poll taxes. As a result, poll taxes were later declared unconstitutional in Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections in 1966.

Part of the Act was walked back decades later, in 2013, when a Supreme Court decision ruled that Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional, holding that the constraints placed on certain states and federal review of states' voting procedures were outdated.

Civil Rights Leaders Assassinated

The civil rights movement had tragic consequences for two of its leaders in the late 1960s. On February 21, 1965, former Nation of Islam leader and Organization of Afro-American Unity founder Malcolm X was assassinated at a rally.

On April 4, 1968, civil rights leader and Nobel Peace Prize recipient Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated on his hotel room's balcony. Emotionally-charged looting and riots followed, putting even more pressure on the Johnson administration to push through additional civil rights laws.

Fair Housing Act of 1968

The Fair Housing Act became law on April 11, 1968, just days after King's assassination. It prevented housing discrimination based on race, sex, national origin and religion. It was also the last legislation enacted during the civil rights era.

The civil rights movement was an empowering yet precarious time for Black Americans. The efforts of civil rights activists and countless protesters of all races brought about legislation to end segregation, Black voter suppression and discriminatory employment and housing practices.

Sources

A Brief History of Jim Crow. Constitutional Rights Foundation.
Civil Rights Act of 1957. Civil Rights Digital Library.
Document for June 25th: Executive Order 8802: Prohibition of Discrimination in the Defense Industry. National Archives.
Greensboro Lunch Counter Sit-In. African American Odyssey.
Little Rock School Desegregation (1957). The Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute Stanford.
Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Global Freedom Struggle. The Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute Stanford.
Rosa Marie Parks Biography. Rosa and Raymond Parks.
Selma, Alabama, (Bloody Sunday, March 7, 1965). BlackPast.org.
The Civil Rights Movement (1919-1960s). National Humanities Center.
The Little Rock Nine. National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior: Little Rock Central High School National Historic Site.
Turning Point: World War II. Virginia Historical Society.

Photo Galleries

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Civil Rights Movement: Timeline, Key Events & Leaders | HISTORY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The civil rights movement was a struggle for justice and equality for African Americans that took place mainly in the 1950s and 1960s. Among its leaders were Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, the Little Rock Nine, Rosa Parks and many others.

# data[].attributes.body
"We Shall Overcome"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Murder of Emmett Till | Articles and Essays | Civil Rights History Project | Digital Collections | Library of Congress

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The murder of 14-year-old Emmett Till in 1955 brought nationwide attention to the racial violence and injustice prevalent in Mississippi. While visiting his relatives in Mississippi, Till went to the Bryant store with his cousins, and may have whistled at Carolyn Bryant. Her husband, Roy Bryant, and…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The March on Washington | Articles and Essays | Civil Rights History Project | Digital Collections | Library of Congress

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For many Americans, the calls for racial equality and a more just society emanating from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on Aug. 28, 1963, deeply affected their views of racial segregation and intolerance in the nation. Since the occasion of March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom 50 years ago, much has been written and discussed about the moment, its impact on society, politics and culture and particularly the profound effects of Martin Luther King’s iconic speech on the hearts and minds of America and the world. Several interviewees from the Civil Rights History Project discuss their memories of this momentous event in American history.