The figure of Michael Jordan remains one of the most emblematic in the history of world sport. With his legacy as one of the best basketball players of all time, his voice is still influential, not only inside the field, but also outside of it. Recently, the former Chicago Bulls player has caused great controversy by expressing an opinion that has divided both fans and sport experts: his request for medals to withdraw to athletes who kneel during the interpretation of the national anthem, a gesture that some associate with the protest against racial injustice and police brutality.

Jordan’s comment has turned on the debate on the right of athletes to manifest politically in sporting events. In his speech, Jordan said that athletes must focus on sport and set aside their personal opinions on political issues. “Sport is to enjoy, not to make manifestations,” he said during an interview in which he stressed that medalists should be an example of unity and not division.

This point of view has generated a polarized reaction. On the one hand, there are those who defend Jordan’s position, arguing that athletes must focus on their performance and not use the sports scenario to make political statements. This group maintains that the withdrawal of the medals to those who kneel in protest would represent a step towards the preservation of the “purity” of sport and neutrality in international events.

However, a significant part of the public and human rights experts have reacted against Jordan’s proposal, highlighting the importance of freedom of expression. For many, the act of kneeling during the national anthem has become a symbol of struggle for racial equality and against discrimination. Personalities such as Colin Kaepernick, who began this gesture in 2016, have defended the idea that athletes have the right to raise their voice and use their platform to address social issues. In fact, some argue that sport, being an area that unites people from diverse cultures and origins, is the perfect space to express these concerns.

In this context, Jordan’s words are perceived as an attempt to stop a movement that has gained strength in recent years. The controversy intensifies when considering that, although Jordan is admired for his contribution to sport, his comments reflect a more conservative vision that could discourage the peaceful protest that seeks to generate significant social change.

The situation raises a broader reflection on the role of athletes in today’s society. Should they remain out of political issues or take advantage of their influence to fight for social justice? This debate will continue to be relevant, especially while figures like Michael Jordan continue to have a deep impact on the sports world and beyond.

In summary, Jordan’s statements about withdrawing medals to athletes who kneel during the national anthem have revived a crucial discussion about the role of sport in politics. Undoubtedly, this issue will continue to be a source of controversy in the next time, while still being evaluated how athletes should behave in relation to their civil rights and social responsibility.