George Foreman showed every gesture is political – especially for Black athletes | Bryan Armen Graham

George Foreman’s Olympic Flag: A Symbol of Complexity in 1968

When George Foreman, a young boxer from Texas, proudly brandished a small American flag in the ring after securing Olympic gold in 1968, he was likely unaware of the contentious political landscape he entered. This image, broadcast to millions during a turbulent era in American history, immediately contrasted with another scene from the same Mexico City Games. Just two days prior, Tommie Smith and John Carlos had silently protested during the US national anthem, heads lowered and black-gloved fists raised—an act that became an iconic representation of 20th-century dissent. Their message was clear: a condemnation of a nation that allowed them to compete internationally while simultaneously denying civil rights to its Black citizens. Their action was perceived as bold defiance, whereas Foreman’s gesture appeared to many as deference to the very systems of oppression they challenged.

However, this interpretation, while understandable given the intense atmosphere of 1968, overlooked deeper nuances concerning Foreman, patriotism, and the weighty burden of symbolic politics placed upon Black athletes.

The Context of 1968: Black Power and Protest

Understanding the backlash faced by the 19-year-old Foreman, particularly within the Black community in 1968, requires acknowledging the prevailing sentiment of that year. It was a time marked by grief and unrest, urban uprisings, and a shift among young people from integrationist ideals to calls for Black self-determination. The assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. just months before had intensified emotions. Black Power had moved from the margins to the forefront of public discourse, becoming a defining ideology and attitude. In this charged environment, a singular expression of Black political consciousness seemed dominant: one of direct protest against injustice.

Smith and Carlos’s quiet yet resolute demonstration resonated powerfully within this climate. Their repercussions were severe: expulsion from the Games, widespread condemnation at home, and professional ostracization for years. They were, and remain, iconic figures of resistance. However, the pressure to conform to this specific mode of protest was immense. Many believed there was only one legitimate way to be Black and politically engaged in that era. Foreman’s flag seemingly contravened this understanding. It lacked the expected language of dissent and did not identify a clear adversary. Consequently, some viewed it as a significant error in judgment.

Foreman’s Perspective: Personal Patriotism

Foreman consistently maintained that his flag display was devoid of political intent. “I was unaware of [the protest] until my return to the Olympic Village,” he stated years later. “My flag wave was simply an expression of joy, not a political statement.”

This apolitical stance was not merely viewed with suspicion; it incensed those actively challenging systemic racism. The mainstream white media’s embrace of Foreman as a “good” Black athlete, in contrast to Smith and Carlos, deepened the divide. He was, perhaps inadvertently, positioned as the acceptable face of patriotism, the antithesis to raised fists.

However, Foreman’s background reveals a more complex narrative. He was raised in poverty in Houston’s segregated Fifth Ward. Boxing became his path out through the Job Corps, a government anti-poverty initiative. For Foreman, the flag represented not a failing government but a nation that offered opportunity. His patriotism was genuine and rooted in personal experience.

Mistaking diverse Black experiences for ideological betrayal is a common error. Expressions of American pride do not inherently negate acknowledgments of its flaws. For Foreman, the flag may have symbolized escape, possibility, and a sense of belonging, despite societal injustices.

Reactions and Transformation

Yet, criticism persisted, branding him an “Uncle Tom” and accusing him of appeasing white America. He described feeling alienated within Black communities. His reaction was not to defend himself but to withdraw. In boxing, he became intimidating—angry, withdrawn, and unapproachable. Outside the ring, he remained silent, projecting suppressed anger. His devastating victory over Joe Frazier in 1973, securing the heavyweight title, was marked not by joy but by grim determination. He appeared less a victor, more a vindicator.

However, narratives evolve, and Foreman’s was no exception. Following his unexpected defeat to Muhammad Ali in Zaire the following year – a loss that profoundly affected him—he retreated from public life for a decade. He embraced religion, became a minister, and established a youth center. His return to boxing in the late 1980s revealed a changed man—older, heavier, and surprisingly affable. Public perception shifted towards affection. He became known for his humor and engaging television appearances. His improbable heavyweight title recapture at age 45 was seen not merely as a comeback but as a complete reinvention.

Legacy of Complexity

The same individual once criticized for waving the flag became a successful entrepreneur, marketing millions of his namesake countertop grills. He starred in a primetime sitcom and named his five sons George. He embraced and amplified his public persona, transforming it from a brooding fighter to a beloved elder statesman, embodying resilience, reinvention, and a pragmatic optimism. Some argue he effectively succeeded Bill Cosby as a prominent American father figure.

It is crucial to remember and respect the profound significance of Smith and Carlos’s protest while avoiding misinterpretations of Foreman’s actions. There is room for both. Black patriotism is multifaceted, encompassing inherent tensions and contradictions. It manifests through both protest and perseverance. A raised fist and a waved flag can both represent expressions of love and determination—an insistence that the nation fulfill its promises. In a country often limiting Black expression to rage or gratitude, George Foreman embodied a more complex reality.

Enduring Lessons from 1968

The lasting lesson of 1968 lies not in judging one form of Black political expression as superior, but in recognizing the immense pressure on Black athletes to symbolize broader societal struggles. Every action is scrutinized, every silence analyzed, every expression of joy questioned. Foreman’s flag, therefore, transcended simple happiness; it highlighted the impossibility of remaining apolitical when identity is inherently politicized by history. He did not celebrate a flawless America, but rather the potential for one.