Lake Larsen | Sports Editor
The athletic apparel company Nike took a bold move on Sept. 4, by making controversial athlete Colin Kaepernick the face of the 30th anniversary of their “Just Do It” campaign. Following Kaepernick’s protest of the unfair treatment of minorities by kneeling for the national anthem, many saw Nike’s move as being anti-police, or anti-America. Because of this many, people took to Twitter, posting pictures and videos burning their Nike shoes and swearing to switch to using other athletic brands. These actions displayed that they would rather destroy their belongings than continue to support a company that does not align with their political beliefs. But where do they turn now?
If you choose to protest Nike’s stance by banishing your Jordans to a bonfire, what company will you choose to switch to? If the political stance of a company is so important to you that you will destroy the belongings that bear their name, whose name will you support?
The first thought you may have is to switch to one of Nike’s largest competitors, Adidas. Let’s think about the political history of Adidas. According to “Golden Kicks: The Shoes that Changed Sports”, it was founded in Germany in 1949 by Adolf Dassler. 16 years prior to founding Adidas, Dassler joined the National Socialist Party, also known as the Nazi party. So maybe choosing a shoe company that provided shoes to Hitler Youth isn’t the best new stance to align with.
The next company one might look to is Under Armour. Looking back into their past, Kevin Plank, the CEO of Under Armour, has come out and publicly endorsed Donald Trump after his controversial Muslim travel ban. This prompted a backlash from major sponsored athletes of Under Armour. According to the washingtonpost.com, Stephen Curry, Dwayne Johnson, and Misty Copeland all came out against Plank. These actions have resulted in dips in their sales, proving that aligning yourself with a divisive president isn’t the best political move.
The last major shoe brand one might switch to is Puma. However, Puma faces a familiar issue. Adolf Dassler, founder of Adidas and a member of the Nazi party, had a brother, Rudolf Dassler. Rudolf Dassler found success in the shoe business like his brother, and just like Adolf, he joined the Nazi party (“Golden Kicks.”) Meaning, Puma was founded by a Nazi just like Adidas.
But what if I told you there was a company founded in America by not one, but two veterans of the US Army? Men that built a brand from selling shoes from the back of their car? Based on alumni.stanford.edu, that company is Nike. The same company people deem “anti-military” was founded by veterans.
If you want to take the nationalist route of whining about a company supporting a person kneeling for their flag because it doesn’t stand for them, maybe look to who you’ll be supporting next. If Nike is a burden to their choices of endorsing Kaepernick, then Puma, Adidas and Under Armour are a burden to the political beliefs of their founders and CEOs. But in the end, buying and wearing shoes doesn’t represent your beliefs. Whining about it does.
Contact the author at llarsen13@wou.edu
Photo courtesy of nike.com
