Surprising Solidarities: Jordan, Romney, NASCAR
Michael Jordan, Mitt Romney, and NASCAR have something in common: they have all said, in their own ways, “we have had enough” in the wake of the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police.
I felt there was change in the air when basketball great Michael Jordan, for years publicly mute on political issues, declared “we have had enough” in the wake of George Floyd’s murder.
As recently as May 5th, Jordan defended his apolitical public persona by saying “I never thought of myself as an activist. I thought of myself as a basketball player.”
But following the murder of George Floyd on May 25th, Jordan said on May 31st: “I stand with those who are calling out the ingrained racism and violence toward people of color in our country. We have had enough.”
Those of us who have been puzzled by Jordan’s longstanding refusal to publicly address racism exclaimed, “Finally!” . . . or words to that effect.
While it is true that Jordan has financially supported the Institute for Community-Police Relations and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, he has never spoken out so forcefully until now. Moreover, Jordan and Nike-owned Jordan Brand have pledged $100 million (half of it his own money) over the next ten years to “organizations dedicated to racial equality, social justice, and education access.”
LeBron James and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar have also delivered bold statements on the issue as expected, but Jordan’s had the most impact following his decades-long reluctance to stick his neck out. Possibly he restrained himself in the past on behalf of Nike, but Nike has now joined a growing list of corporations that have also had enough—or at least said so.
Mitt Romney, now-Senator, once-Massachusetts Governor, once-Presidential candidate, also delivered a happy surprise by marching with Black Lives Matter protesters, bringing along a thousand-strong contingent of Christian evangelicals of the more benevolent stripe. Skeptics questioned whether Romney would follow this gesture with substantive action—knowing he would have an uphill battle against fellow Black Lives Don’t Matter Senate Republicans—but if symbolism counts for anything, Romney’s gesture was huge. In his shirtsleeves, he would have been an easy target for counter-protesters, but unlike President Trump, Romney seems willing to take serious risks in order to make a statement.
Jordan’s and Romney’s stands, however, pale in significance beside the moment of silence observed by NASCAR drivers in recognition of the tragedy of George Floyd’s death prior to a race in Atlanta on Sunday. The thirty seconds of silence were preceded by a message from NASCAR president Steve Phelps:
Our country is in pain and people are justifiably angry, demanding to be heard. . . . The black community and all people of color have suffered in our country and it has taken far too long for us to hear their demands for a change. Our sport must do better. Our country must do better. The time is now to listen, to understand and to stand against racism and racial injustice. We ask our drivers, our competitors and all our fans to join us in this mission to take a moment of reflection.
Well. NASCAR. Need we say more?
(There is more, on an international automotive front, from six-time Formula I world champion Lewis Hamilton, who has criticized fellow drivers for staying silent on racial injustice and police violence.)
Much needs to change on the ground
Three notable turning points by celebrities do not a reform movement make, although I expect they will have a significant impact on their admirers. Nor do widespread street protests—profound, needed, and moving as they are—necessarily translate into positive changes on the ground.
The ground is more complicated. There are 18,000 police departments in the United States, with more than 680,000 officers. Most of them have entrenched, sometimes severe, racism in their ranks. Chiefs of police, most prominently Art Acevedo in Houston and Terence Monahan in NYC, have attempted reform, but you can’t fire half your police force. You have to work with what you’ve been given by your predecessors. As long as you have deep-rooted bias among some officers, and police unions who push back hard when misbehaving cops are disciplined, you will have racism spread by contagion among the rest.
What’s more, white supremacists try to infiltrate the police—they may step up efforts now that they feel they are under attack even within police departments.
(Just do a web search on “police connection with white supremacists” and you will get upwards of 590 hits.)
On the ground we have terrorism imposed upon people of color. It’s”terrorism” because it carries oppression a step further than discriminatory rules. It’s “merely” oppression when you have a system of inhumane rules, which, if you follow, you are immune from harm. But there’s an extra ingredient that makes oppression terrorism, and that is arbitrariness. The grim humor that refers to “driving while black,” “walking while black,” “running while black,” “going into a store while black,” “bird-watching while black,” “sitting-at-home-minding-your-own-business while black,” as offenses punishable by violence, reflects the understanding that African-Americans are often targeted not because of what they’ve done but because of their race. You can follow all the rules and still have the authorities come at you from out of nowhere, with guns and batons and pepper spray and tasers, and treat you roughly, beat, strangle, wound, or kill you, for no particular reason except for your ancestry.
Realistic actions toward reform should be deeply thought out
There is talk of “defunding” the police,* and the Minneapolis City Council is going so far as to “dismantle” the police department and replace it with a “community-led public safety” option. That sounds promising, if it could be enacted.
But why should police end racist violence when even the U.S. Supreme Court, in the case of the City of Los Angeles vs Lyons, enshrined racist violence into law in 1983? The trick that gave Los Angeles a pass on the nearly deadly chokehold assault on Adolph Lyons was a supposed lack of “standing.” Lyons lost an injunction against the police department’s use of the chokehold because to have “standing” he would have to show that he personally was likely to be choked by an LAPD officer a second time.
That was in 1983. We can expect today’s Supreme Court with a 5-4 conservative majority to do likewise on similar issues.
In The New Jim Crow ** Michelle Alexander points out that:
Procedural hurdles such as the “standing requirement,” have made it virtually impossible to seek reform of law enforcement agencies through the judicial process, even when the policies or practices at issue are illegal or plainly discriminatory.
Therefore, whatever laws are written to reform the criminal justice system will have to be written with great care in anticipation of suits being brought by police to a biased Supreme Court such as we have today (not to mention so many lower federal courts that Mitch McConnell is packing with ultra-conservatives). Lyons sued Los Angeles, but you can bet, going the other way, that cops will be contriving their own lawsuits to justify bad behavior, and even ask for injunctions (the kind with “standing”) to ward off restrictions on their use of force.
More as we watch what substantive measures will be taken that will stick—and watch them stick. Or not. Remember what has happened with gun control legislation. Vigilance required.
============ footnotes ==============
* Conservatives have pounced on “defunding the police” as extreme. On Don Lemon’s segment of CNN last night, Cory Booker agreed with Joe Biden that the term could alienate Independents. All on the Left agree that police departments should be reorganized, but how you phrase it as well as how you do it could make a world of difference. It’s not a wild guess to expect Minneapolis cops to threaten to walk off the job if a root-and-branch dismantling were to be attempted.
[Don Lemon’s two hour 10-12 slot nightly on CNN brings a unique African-American perspective, with a reasoned although often biting tone. Much recommended for night owls.]
** p. 161 in new 2020 edition. Alexander’s book deals mainly with mass incarceration, but police street violence pops up frequently in that discussion.