Meredith Cash. "Carli Lloyd is getting roasted for saying the USWNT 'has each other's backs' after standing during the anthem on MLK day" Business Insider, January 19, 2021. https://www.insider.com/carli-lloyd-stands-anthem-says-uswnt-has-each-others-backs-2021-1
By kneeling instead of standing, you are demonstrating inferiority. While you are making a statement that some people are not being treated equally before the law, you are nevertheless behaving as if you're the lesser.
Throughout history, those considered inferior had to demonstrate their status of their inferiority by a number of ways. For example, before the Europeans retook Spain, Jews weren't allowed to build their synagogues as high as Muslim mosques; male Japanese commoners were made to shave the center of their heads; and of course, everyone must bow or kneel before a European monarch or noble. But there is another reason for it
In the US Constitution all men are created equally, so why are you kneeling instead of standing? That act makes you to look more like a lowly slave than being among equals.
Besides this, you are subverting the attention of the audience by that act. You lack proper respect that while you do not turn your back or walk away, and the kneeling seemed to present a more respectful show, you nevertheless by doing so is adding a "But" to it.
"I love my country... but the Police are a bunch of racists and Black Lives Matter!"
That makes those standing better than you are because they have more respect for the flag as it stands for freedom. You could always demonstrate later, but the standing before the flag, laying the hand to the heart, and singing of the anthem is to be done without interruption.
If you truly love your county, you should NEVER subvert the practice of it.
No, not any time soon but that also is my opinion. I will say this however.
Any leader of any party, or any governmental model can ruin the country, just can each can prosper it. It all depends on making sound judgments. You and I are against dictators and rightfully so, but even dictators can prosper his/her country if the right decisions are made. One needs only to look at the great empires of history such as the Persian, Babylonian, and Roman, and Peter the Great to see that it is not impossible to rule with success
With that said, such rule depends entirely on how knowledgeable s/he is, the level of his/her integrity, and how willing the ruler is to suggestion. S/he does not know everything. S/he might be a great war leader, but if s/he does not understand how the market economy works, then s/he'll be making decisions out of ignorance or heed advices of biased, ideological opinion which will likely sow the seeds of ruin. But suppose if s/he knows everything about the market economy, warfare, geopolitics, etc, but does not listen, s/he too will sow the seeds of ruin.
We are blessed to live under a representative democracy, where the executive power is checked by the two other powers, but even with ours if the executive does not listen or woefully ignorant of matters crucial then s/he could do great damage to our country. Good that we have elections every four years, but if it becomes an acceptable trend by the voting public, or the executive managed to wrest power from the two branches becoming a totalitarian power, then we are in trouble.
Lastly, if s/he does not act according to his/her integrity, s/he may know everything and heed good opinion, but eventually not do both for long. Selfish ambition, greed, or cowardice will soon dictate his/her decisions, and between the three errors this is the most deadly. It will set a trend to others to follow, and soon will discredit the executive and the government as a whole.