(ThyBlackMan.com) Throughout our history, Americans have often (though certainly not always) striven to build a wall, or at least a fence, to separate church from state. Even as a devout Christian, I recognize the potential pitfalls of too deeply intertwining the two. Additionally, formally integrating church and state would give rise to myriad religious dilemmas, some of which would be very contentious. For example, if our government were to adopt Christianity as our national religion, which denomination would prevail? Presbyterian? Methodism? Baptist? If Baptist, which version thereof? Should we be Calvinistic or Arminian? (Christian nationalists seem ill-prepared to answer such thorny queries.)
By contrast, there has never been a period in which we have had even a perfunctory separation of politics from sports — never an era in which sports were unsoiled by the realities of the “outside” world. Indeed, a certain amount of politics is “baked in” vis-à-vis athletic competitions. For example, the man who we know as Jim Thorpe could not simply enjoy the fruits of being the greatest athlete of the early 20th century because he was Native American (a term that is fraught). Thorpe won multiple Olympic medals on behalf of the U.S. in 1912 — a dozen years before the U.S. government declared Native Americans to be citizens.
Politics also infuses sports on a macro level. For example, people from other countries often marvel at the fact that Americans recite the Pledge of Allegiance and/or sing the National Anthem before the vast majority of our sporting contests, from pee wee leagues through the professional ranks. And, yes, the deliberate inculcation of patriotism is an inherently political act. (I recently attended the Brickyard 400, which featured a military jet “fly over” ahead of the race, which is always a thrill for me.)
Of course, America is not alone when it comes to the encroachment of politics into sports. Geopolitical challenges have always affected even the world’s biggest sporting event — the Olympic Games (ancient and modern). Consider the political violence in Munich in 1972, or the multi-country boycotts of 1956, 1976, 1980, and 1984. Countries have boycotted the Games when they believe that participating in them will give credence to other countries that have behaved egregiously. Then there is Russia being excluded from this year’s Olympics — appropriately so — due to its invasion of Ukraine.
All of this is quite understandable. On the other hand, it is difficult for me to comprehend that Americans “boycott” some of our national teams due to domestic political disagreements. Perhaps the most prominent example concerns the U.S. Men’s Basketball Team. That team is comprised exclusively of NBA players, all of whom are African American. In recent years, the NBA has used its outsized platform to promote social causes, especially racial justice. I effusively applaud the league’s owners, commissioner, and players for doing so. However, a large swath of white Americans find such advocacy to be offensive — or even pretend that it is somehow “racist.”
I have taken the time to wade through hundreds of comments on social media. It’s odd to seem them root for the teams against which Americans are competing. It’s surreal to witness the demeaning, vulgar, and overtly racist language that is leveled at our athletes. This is true even for someone who is as cynical as I am regarding the permanence of racial animus and discrimination in America. Some of the players, Kevin Durant chiefly among them, engage in back-and-forth online battles with such detractors. (Few people can dish it out as effectively as Durant.)
The haters often are the same people who loudly proclaim their “patriotism” — such as by vilifying WNBA star Brittney Griner — even as they valorize the Jan. 6 traitors. They exhort Americans to “back the blue” even while ignoring or obfuscating the fact that roughly 150 police officers were injured as they defended democracy in our nation’s capital. In short, their “patriotism” is fleeting, malleable, oxymoronic, and even contradictory.
Dissent is the sine qua non of democracy. Indeed, authoritarianism is both the parent and child of ideological, philosophical, and political unanimity. Our political debates – like our sports debates — should be rigorous, rancorous, and raucous, but they can never be allowed to lead us away from upholding our sacred trust to preserve the American experiment.
Written by Larry Smith
