You're accusing me of pretending and it's clear you're not actually understanding the point i'm making. You seem to be fixated on the element of danger as your reasoning, without taking into consideration the changes in time & perspectives, media coverage, and the fact that they were fighting against such a tide was because all of their efforts were criticised and reduced to things such as gimmicks. We look back on their bravery and courage now because we have the benefit of hindsight and can see what good they were actually intending to do - but if you read any of MLK's letters from prison, Malcolm X's books, listened to Fred Hamptons speeches etc - you'll see that their efforts weren't valued at the time of their life.
Once again - isn't that the point of education? If you're saying that someone can't change their political stance on an issue such as racial equality in the space of 12 months, how are you getting upset that taking the knee hasn't made any difference in a similar length of time? According to you, it was never going to be possible.
Then you haven't paid attention to anything his protest his done, and are speaking from a place of ignorance. It's easy to look up and research.
You're the one who brought up Kaepernick all on your own, and you're the one who seemingly has your own rules as to who's protest is valid & who's is not.
Just because it isn't as hard as it is now for black athletes doesn't mean it's easy still. The point of the civil rights movements was to progress things further - so progress has been made, but things still aren't in a good enough place are they? So it's logical for people to still express themselves when they see fit.
& Sterling made it clear that it was hard for him and that's why he didn't say anything for years until it all got too much, again if you did the research on this, you'd see that.
Neither was the kneel - Kaepernick talked with veterans and asked their opinions on whether kneeling was disrespectful to the american flag - those veterans told him it wasn't and he chose that as a means for protest - it was only the media who decided to say it was.
Also the fist was reported by media as a disrespect to the American anthem at the time, again, it's only now with hindsight that its seen and reported differently.
And yet you can't see what the point is of implementing long term antiracism protests before every football match? What's the alternative? Do nothing and hope that racism in football magically disappeared? That worked well in the past didn't it.
Nothing you said helped me because the things you're saying are not only incorrect but misinformed - i'm happy to have a debate with anyone who has a reason for not wanting to see people take the knee.
But you've already made it clear that in your mind someone can't change their political views within 12 months (Kaepernick) while also decrying that taking the knee hasn't led to any change in the last 12 months either. You've also got conflated ideas about what political protests looked like in the past and how they were reported then vs how they are written about now with the benefit of hindsight. MLK's Letter from a Birmingham Jail seems pretty apt to this exact situation - yet, let you tell it his march was received positively and everybody thought what he was doing was worthwhile. It wasn't.
